Group for SWT photon related questions

I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie

Rennie Allen <rgallen@attbi.com> wrote:

I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie

As I mentioned in another post few weeks ago, QSS is going to dump
this NNTP based service and replace it with a web based forum.
They probably will consider your suggestion for the new forum, but
I doubt they will spend more time enhancing the inn.qnx.com

Frank

“Frank Liu” <fliu@mail.vipstage.com> wrote in message
news:bki23v$jmg$1@inn.qnx.com

Rennie Allen <> rgallen@attbi.com> > wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt
group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie


As I mentioned in another post few weeks ago, QSS is going to dump
this NNTP based service and replace it with a web based forum.

It took them about 7 years (after we first heard about the intention) to
actually move from QUICS to NNTP.

They probably will consider your suggestion for the new forum, but
I doubt they will spend more time enhancing the inn.qnx.com

Adding another group is not much of an enhancement and does not take much
longer than 5 minutes.

– igor

Rennie Allen <rgallen@attbi.com> wrote:

I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Just ask on any of the Photon groups (I watch them all). Just put SWT in the
topic. If you actually have a bug you can post it on dev.eclipse.org/bugs/.
Feel free to email me if you want as well.

chris


Chris McKillop <cdm@qnx.com> “The faster I go, the behinder I get.”
Software Engineer, QSSL – Lewis Carroll –
http://qnx.wox.org/

If anybody cares, I’d certainly vote against moving from NNTP to a web
based forum!!! I’ve never seen ANY web based forum that was anywhere
near as user friend as a news reader, and I’ve seen a quite a number of
them. My experience is that I finally give up and decide that my time
is too valuable to waste messing with yet another failed attempt to
improve on NNTP.

Murf

Frank Liu wrote:

Rennie Allen <> rgallen@attbi.com> > wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie


As I mentioned in another post few weeks ago, QSS is going to dump
this NNTP based service and replace it with a web based forum.
They probably will consider your suggestion for the new forum, but
I doubt they will spend more time enhancing the inn.qnx.com

Frank

In article <3F6CF265.EFB42E06@perftech.com>, murf@perftech.com says…

If anybody cares, I’d certainly vote against moving from NNTP to a web
based forum!!!

Well, it looks like beating a dead horse, but anyway, my vote is also against moving from NNTP.
Best regards,
Eduard

I’ve never seen ANY web based forum that was anywhere
near as user friend as a news reader, and I’ve seen a quite a number of
them. My experience is that I finally give up and decide that my time
is too valuable to waste messing with yet another failed attempt to
improve on NNTP.

John A. Murphy <murf@perftech.com> wrote:
JAM > If anybody cares, I’d certainly vote against moving from NNTP to a web
JAM > based forum!!! I’ve never seen ANY web based forum that was anywhere
JAM > near as user friend as a news reader, and I’ve seen a quite a number of
JAM > them. My experience is that I finally give up and decide that my time
JAM > is too valuable to waste messing with yet another failed attempt to
JAM > improve on NNTP.

JAM > Murf

I agree 100%!

Don’t change it again!

People have many very useful scripts and programs for accessing these
news groups.

QSSL, you do this about every 5 year and it is a pain in the ass.
Please leave the newsgroups alone!


How can I be any more blunt!

Everyone else that agrees should add their voice NOW!


Bill Caroselli – Q-TPS Consulting
1-(708) 308-4956 <== Note: New Number
qtps@earthlink.net

John A. Murphy <murf@perftech.com> wrote:

If anybody cares, I’d certainly vote against moving from NNTP to a web
based forum!!! I’ve never seen ANY web based forum that was anywhere
near as user friend as a news reader, and I’ve seen a quite a number of
them. My experience is that I finally give up and decide that my time
is too valuable to waste messing with yet another failed attempt to
improve on NNTP.

Believe me, several of us already tried when we first heard the “rumor”,
and were told we were beating the dead horse.
Maybe if enough people complain here, they will reverse the decision :slight_smile:

Frank

John A. Murphy wrote:

If anybody cares, I’d certainly vote against moving from NNTP to a web
based forum!!! I’ve never seen ANY web based forum that was anywhere
near as user friend as a news reader, and I’ve seen a quite a number of
them. My experience is that I finally give up and decide that my time
is too valuable to waste messing with yet another failed attempt to
improve on NNTP.

My $0.02: I certainly find nothing wrong with NNTP based forums, but I don’t feel strongly enough about it to get very excited.
Maybe the web stuff will be better; ultimately, I think NNTP was better than QUICS, so I’ll give it the benefit of the doubt.

If anybody cares, I’d certainly vote against moving from NNTP to a web
based forum!!! I’ve never seen ANY web based forum that was anywhere
near as user friend as a news reader, and I’ve seen a quite a number of

I do also vote against web-based forum.

The Good Thing™ about NNTP is that you can choose
any user-side interface (readers) you like;
with web-based forums, you’re confined to a web browser, and
UI and usecase is determined by the forum system.

Some web-forums do have the view/post protocol standarized
to have non-web-browser readers to emerge, but that’s an exception.


kabe

The rumors to move to web based forums are not completely unfounded, but the
decision is not final as far I am concerned. We may do both.

Your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks,
Jim Plantinga
QNX Manager of IS



“Frank Liu” <fliu@mail.vipstage.com> wrote in message
news:bki23v$jmg$1@inn.qnx.com

Rennie Allen <> rgallen@attbi.com> > wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt
group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie


As I mentioned in another post few weeks ago, QSS is going to dump
this NNTP based service and replace it with a web based forum.
They probably will consider your suggestion for the new forum, but
I doubt they will spend more time enhancing the inn.qnx.com

Frank

“J Plantinga” <jplantinga@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:bkofc6$73u$1@inn.qnx.com

The rumors to move to web based forums are not completely unfounded, but
the
decision is not final as far I am concerned. We may do both.

Your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks,
Jim Plantinga
QNX Manager of IS

I like Newsgroup format because it allows me to easely keep a local copy I
can do search on. It requires less bandwidth which is appreciated when I
sometimes go in the field and the only internet access is via cell phone for
example.

My only hope is that the IS departement doesn’t switch just to make THEIR
life easier but to answer request of higher % of QNX customer that prefer
web interface over nntp. If it’s from a customer response then all gladly
adapt to whatever you switch to.

  • Mario

Mario Charest postmaster@127.0.0.1 wrote:


MC > I like Newsgroup format because it allows me to easely keep a local copy I
MC > can do search on. It requires less bandwidth which is appreciated when I
MC > sometimes go in the field and the only internet access is via cell phone for
MC > example.

Yes, there are many of us that keep a local data base. Many times a
day I look something up in my local data base when I don’t even know
which newsgroup it might be in.

Do you really want many requests a day searching through every
message you have just to find something obscure. That should kill your
CPU horsepower pretty effectivly.

J Plantinga <jplantinga@qnx.com> wrote:

The rumors to move to web based forums are not completely unfounded, but the
decision is not final as far I am concerned. We may do both.

Glad to “see” you here Jim!

I highly recommend jive (www.jivesoft.com). Lots of big guys use
it (http://www.jivesoft.com/customers.jsp). I found it while on
Sun and VMware’s web forums. It is the only forum software that
officially supports gatewaying with NNTP. It’s easily skinnable to
fit to the rest of your website. The plugin auth makes it easy
to fit into your existing authentication mechanism.
It has a 30-day eval license that you can try out.
I tried it for a while but couldn’t afford the license for a
hobby site. This shouldn’t be a problem for you since the license
is much cheaper than one copy of QNX commercial product :slight_smile:
Let me know if you need any help.
BTW, just like qdn, their support forum is monitored and answered
by the developers directly.

Frank

We don’t consider the newsgroups a high maintenance item. At least the
public ones. The concern is more that if we offer Web based ones and NNTP
based ones, we add more places for our techies to look for postings to
respond to and we get into situations were some people will need to cross
post to the web based forums alongside the NNTP ones to make sure their
question/concern is heard.

The decision is not entirely mine, but I am a stakeholder since my team
needs to maintain the systems. I personally favour a NNTP/Web hybrid. We
have many client companies that block NNTP at their firewall and we have a
strong following on NNTP based newsgroups so a hybrid solution keeps both
happy.

The trade off is that we loose some of the features of a exclusively web
based forum system.

Thanks again for your feedback.
Jim


“Mario Charest” postmaster@127.0.0.1 wrote in message
news:bkpapj$q8k$1@inn.qnx.com

“J Plantinga” <> jplantinga@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:bkofc6$73u$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
The rumors to move to web based forums are not completely unfounded, but
the
decision is not final as far I am concerned. We may do both.

Your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks,
Jim Plantinga
QNX Manager of IS


I like Newsgroup format because it allows me to easely keep a local copy I
can do search on. It requires less bandwidth which is appreciated when I
sometimes go in the field and the only internet access is via cell phone
for
example.

My only hope is that the IS departement doesn’t switch just to make THEIR
life easier but to answer request of higher % of QNX customer that prefer
web interface over nntp. If it’s from a customer response then all gladly
adapt to whatever you switch to.

  • Mario

Jim Plantinga <jplantinga@qnx.com> wrote:

The trade off is that we loose some of the features of a exclusively web
based forum system.

not if you use jive :slight_smile:

on the other hand, you could have a hybrid for all public groups.
and use web only for future beta groups, and/or private groups.

Frank

Uzytkownik “Rennie Allen” <rgallen@attbi.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:bkhtmt$gk1$1@inn.qnx.com

I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt
group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie

Jim Plantinga <jplantinga@qnx.com> wrote:

We have many client companies that block NNTP at their firewall …

That’s no excuse :slight_smile:
http->nntp gateway has been there for years:
http://www.openqnx.com/NewsPortal.html

You should do both. I mean you should have HTTP-based NNTP gateway. The fact
that a decent newsreader is infinitely more convinient than any web
interface is obvious enough and does not need arguing. However the firewalls
in most corporations do not allow NNTP and getting exceptions is a headache.
So HTTP gateway is helpful for those behind the corporate walls … and for
all the people who do not know about
NNTP in the first place.

“J Plantinga” <jplantinga@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:bkofc6$73u$1@inn.qnx.com

The rumors to move to web based forums are not completely unfounded, but
the
decision is not final as far I am concerned. We may do both.

Your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks,
Jim Plantinga
QNX Manager of IS



“Frank Liu” <> fliu@mail.vipstage.com> > wrote in message
news:bki23v$jmg$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
Rennie Allen <> rgallen@attbi.com> > wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt
group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie


As I mentioned in another post few weeks ago, QSS is going to dump
this NNTP based service and replace it with a web based forum.
They probably will consider your suggestion for the new forum, but
I doubt they will spend more time enhancing the inn.qnx.com

Frank

I’m agree with you.
According to my ‘small’ experience, web based forum are not so easy to
use, we are mainly overwhelmed by banners, gif, publicities, and others
unusefull html embelishments.

Please keep NNTP, we need helps, infos, that’s all.

If someone has some time to waste in QSSL, please ask him to accomplish
the mountain of yet inexisting documentations.

cheers,
Alain.

John A. Murphy a écrit:

If anybody cares, I’d certainly vote against moving from NNTP to a web
based forum!!! I’ve never seen ANY web based forum that was anywhere
near as user friend as a news reader, and I’ve seen a quite a number of
them. My experience is that I finally give up and decide that my time
is too valuable to waste messing with yet another failed attempt to
improve on NNTP.

Murf

Frank Liu wrote:


Rennie Allen <> rgallen@attbi.com> > wrote:


I think it would be a good idea to have a qdn.public.qnxrtp.photon.swt group, to
ask photon related SWT questions. Anyone else agree ?

Rennie



As I mentioned in another post few weeks ago, QSS is going to dump
this NNTP based service and replace it with a web based forum.
They probably will consider your suggestion for the new forum, but
I doubt they will spend more time enhancing the inn.qnx.com

Frank