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]>