ACEDB Newsgroup

[Bradley K. Sherman]

In article <1qdjei$98j at agate.berkeley.edu> mcobb at fly2 (Mellissa Marie Curie Cobb;539 LSA;3-9944) writes:
>Francis Oullette  wrote>
>>my point was not for a general bionet.software group (we already have
>>that, and it is probably the 2nd most used group in the bionet tree
>>(after methods, not counting genbank.updates), but for a general
>>software.GENOME group ... where ACEDB, and the others would be
>>discussed ...  the thing I don't like about this group is not the
[...]

It is unfortunate that it is difficult to disambiguate the C. elegans
database from the ACEDB software.  I also agree that the group *might*
be too narrowly focused to generate a critical mass of commentary.

That said, I would argue in favor of the single-thread newsgroup.
I would be reticent to contribute --and would be surprised to find--
very detailed information about ACEDB in a forum where a significant
fraction of the participants are primarily interested in different
software or in metadiscussions about genome mapping database software.

And I have never found empty newsgroups to be a problem.

    --bks

-- 
Bradley K. Sherman, Dendrome Project
Institute of Forest Genetics, USDA Forest Service
P.O. Box 245, Berkeley, CA, 94701, USA
Phone: 510-559-6437   FAX: -6440 Internet: bks at s27w007.pswfs.gov