On Tue, 13 Jul 93 08:23 EDT Duane Weaver said in a private reply the
following, which he gave me permission to post for him:
 
| The Unix version called LISTSERVER is NOT, I repeat NOT a
| full implementation of the Revised LISTSERV as known on
| Bitnet.
|
| I can say that with experience.  I used to manage a Revised LISTSERV.
| We are now running the unix LISTSERVER.
|
| LISTSERVER is a unixfied version of what the author thinks LISTSERV
| does.   I understand it is writtin in C.   A student worker here said
| the code is poorly written.    Things do work differently.
| The mail headers of mail from LISTSERVER are different.
|
| There are a few features that only recently became available in
| the Revised LISTSERV.
|
| LISTSERVER is also not as robust as the Revised LISTSERV.   IT
| appears that processing a list with slightly over 400 subscribers
| puts a strain on the server.
|
| Documentation is typical of unix software; in my opinion, piss poor.
|
| Duane
 
One comment:
I've heard Duane's comment re documentation (or its near equiv.)
uttered quite often by others.
A partial clarification is that people not used to the Unix mindset
have difficulty reading such documentation, and understanding it
costs a *lot* of effort.
One must constantly think in symbolic and hierarchical terms if one
is to make ones peace with the Unix mindset.  Such people exist,
that is obvious (the experts/gurus).
Many of these however don't seem to (want to) understand that not
all people are like that, or even wish to be so.
 
Request:
Would those responsible for past/present/future documentation please
consider the plight of non-experts, and (re)write it looking through
the eyes of those confused new users?
 
 
Regards, and thanks in advance.
$$\       F. Scott Ophof     <[log in to unmask]>