call for discussion: how should these U**X/*86 newsgroups be named?

[Paul Vixie]

In article <182 at visenix.UUCP> beattie at visenix.UUCP (Brian Beattie) writes:
# > 	comp.unix.microport	destroy
# > 	comp.unix.xenix		destroy
# This proposal assumes that Xenix will become so much like
# Intel/Microport/ATT/ISC that the groups will completely overlap
# I find this doubtfull.  I believe that Microsoft will continue
# to have significant differences from the V/AT and V/386 products.

I am convinced by this argument of the need for

	comp.unix.sysv.i286
	comp.unix.sysv.i386
	comp.unix.sysv.xenix

That is: okay, I'll take your word for the fact that Xenix will always be
bizarre.  Let's give it its own group.  All other 286 ports are basically
alike, as are all other 386 ports.

With trivial effort, I can be convinced that xenix does not belong in .sysv.
-- 
Paul Vixie
Digital Equipment Corporation	Work:  vixie at dec.com	Play:  paul at vixie.UUCP
Western Research Laboratory	 uunet!decwrl!vixie	   uunet!vixie!paul
Palo Alto, California, USA	  +1 415 853 6600	   +1 415 864 7013