To: John Tzerkesis

 RS> There is also normally a full message ID which allows complete
 RS> threading etc too.

 JT> Ok, my next question is, if there IS enough information in the
 JT> public message as to who that message is intended for, the WHY
 JT> didn't they already write this into the gating software?

 BL> There isn't...

 JT> Yeah, I think it refers to the person who started the thread,
 JT> and going on the goings-on in avtech and such, the "thread"
 JT> changes thread many many times even though the subject remains
 JT> the same. :-)

  Without a To: our AVT-style mail will develop into a total shambles.
I still remember the first time I discovered AVT, after Frank told me
to have a look 'cos I'd liek it (he was obviously insulting me). I'd
come from the SPCUG where everyone is polite and well organised, and
there was a Subject "My new VCR" discussing farting in nursing homes.
WOW! Straight away, I knew these were my kinda people.

 JT> Ok, getting your software to do it would be the ideal solution,
 JT> and the gating softare to take advantage of this as well. This
 JT> is why I prefer PD or GNU software. You can change/add/remove
 JT> whatever without re-inventing the wheel. I've come close to
 JT> doing that....

  Apparently, there is an X-Comment-To: line already registered. UUCP
allows "X-" lines to be user added in the header so I'll write it into
my reader (in fact, I've already done it). 

  This is why I prefer to write my own. Most things are just a shell.
I use fxuucico for the coms, gzip for the archiver, my favourite DOS
editor, and the rest is just Windows pretties in Delphi to tie it up
and process packets in and out. This way, I learn all about the UUCP
format painlessly.

 JT> The reason it is not any better today, is because, the
 JT> alternative to UUCP, (live links) have become so common, it is
 JT> not warranted to "revamp" UUCP. Sure, in our case, it may
 JT> warrant using another form and call it UUCP+ or whatever.

  I would hope so. The ultimate is to send mail already processed in
database form. Then all you do is read it and add a path line... BUT,
PEWankerNet should remain Internet UUCP compatible so that we can not
only use the Internet to transport it, but also accept UUCP feeds and
give them.

 JT> Depending on how popular the store-and-forward method becomes,
 JT> it may happen too. But, going on what has happened in the past,
 JT> I don't see there being any increase in demand for a better
 JT> UUCP. If we want a better one, we'll have to invent it
 JT> ourselves.

  The whole concept has changed... not minutes on the phone but HOURS.

Regards,
Bob

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
@EOT:

---