On Mon, 23 Nov 1992 08:42:06 NFT Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@FRORS12> said: >I see the point in both cases - the name "Revised LISTSERV" comes from >the fact that there used to be (before my time :) another LISTSERV (at >BITNIC?) that had the right idea, but Eric improved it much more with >his new server, so he called it "Revised." So, the _name_ LISTSERV >existed before Revised Listserv. Maybe I should clarify here. The reason the thing we now call BITNET LISTSERV was initially dubbed "Revised LISTSERV" is, precisely, that there was another program called LISTSERV; in fact, there were two, the "BITNIC LISTSERV" and the "NCSUVM LISTSERV". The reason I did not call my program XYZSERV and, indeed, the reason I wrote it at all is that the people in charge of the original LISTSERV were spending little or no time improving it due to having other things to do. There was no compatibility issue since the original LISTSERV did not accept commands at all, all it did was receive messages and send them to lists of people, ie about the functionality of a SMTP exploder (shortly after Revised LISTSERV was released, a new version of the original LISTSERV with 3-4 commands was written but it was never released - it only ran at the developer's site). The server's helpfiles made it clear that this was different code, explained what was new and described how one could interface the 3 types of servers without creating loops. Nobody ever complained to me about the ambiguity of the documentation, nor did anyone ask me to rename my server to something else. All these historical documents were removed a few years later as the original LISTSERV's had disappeared completely and user support people complained that it confused their users. Eric