[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Argh! I just tried to agree with Bob/Wendy and forgot to reply-all.
Sorry to whoever got my email.
I really preferred the list when response went to the list.
Much as I know that correct behaviour is the current one, yes I've noticed
traffic has dropped noticeably.
I have a number of times accidentally done reply to instead of reply all, it
might be a matter of getting used to it, but I would say it does reduce
discussion. However on the other side I do see the hundreds of emails that
Larry and Chuck receive due to reject emails and bounces, which this
Can't get used to using reply to all, if I get an Email I want to
reply to that Email.
Les Sherlock Hewkin
Senior Developer
Core Systems - 9951
01604 592289
-Original Message-
From: u2ug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 16 March 2006 01:30
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
I will be out of the office starting 15/03/2006 and will not return until
17/03/2006.
I will respond to your message when I return.
___
The information contained in this message is intended for the addressee
only
Rudy
What does your code look like?
BTW...You should use SQLExecDirect when calling stored procedures, when
it doesn't need to be called repeatedly (as it is supposedly more
efficient). Check out the online help or BCI manuals for more info.
Here's a snippet of source code from a real sample of
I am used to the changes. I dont see a problem with it. However, the
traffic has seemed to drop. We could be missing out on some interesting
discussion. The problem is that some people have a hard time adapting
to change. I think the reply / reply to all is a nice choice to have.
Sometimes
We've had some clients have trouble with the Broadcom gigabit cards.
Swapping them out resolved the issues. This was a while ago. Updated
drivers may help.
Hth
Colin Alfke
Calgary Canada
-Original Message-
From: Mike Pflugfelder
Hi all,
I remember seeing something in the list a
I don't post much, and as a result maybe my opinion doesn't count. But
this reply all is a pain.
For instance this one. I clicked the reply all on the last email of this
topic. So I remove Anthony Dzikiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the
TO:. I'm sure he doesn't want my post twice. Then I
I do not like the 'reply-all' feature either.
As developers, I would hope that we would not add a feature to our user
interfaces that annoyed all of the users every time they used it, so I don't
see why we should tolerate doing it to ourselves. Presumably the list
moderator is trying to solve
In my opinion, the *reply* behavior of the mailing list needs to reflect the
announcement vs. discussion mentality of the group.
The announcement mentality puts the emphasis on announcing ideas and
issues, and promotes discussion between the poster and individuals wanting
to know more details.
I did not post too many messages either, as I am new to UniVerse. I am
still learning. But I am thinking that we(ourselves) could have a choice
on how to reply the email to the list.
Currently, if I want to reply to the person posted the email only, I
just hit the Reply on my outlook. If I need
When I hit reply all, I have to:
1. remove the person's name from the To: box
2. move the Cc: name (u2-users...) to the To: box
That is a waste of my time, and tedious. If we programmed a user interface
like that we would be laughed at.
I'll vote for the old way: reply being a reponse to
Well, I had forgotten about it, and started to reply yesterday, noticed the
'to' was wrong and fixed it. Didn't bother me a'tall !
You do have excellent suggestions though. Not everyone is as careful with
the 'to' as I am.
Once you've sent a message to the wrong 'to' you never forget to do
I concur.
- Original Message -
From: Tony Gravagno [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:59 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] Changes to the List
Bruce Nichol wrote:
How many now know to Reply All if they want a moment of fame on the
list?
And
Don't go there. I think this was discussed many times and the consensus was
no. I personally hate, is hate too strong a word, having to go to a group
site to find out what is going on. Most of the people on this list work for
a living and don't have the time to search out answering questions
Interestingly, that gmane site had a posting rate chart (see link below)
which confirms that usage has dropped off. However, you can see that it
did the same last year as well so can't necessarily be attributed to the
list change being discussed.
I don't care either way. I don't post too
Perceived problem? How about I add you to the moderator list, and you can
perceive the 1,500 bounce/vacation autoresponse/error emails that end up
in YOUR inbox in less than an hour because someone's brain-dead mail server
doesn't know how to properly parse email headers? :-D
Larry Hiscock
I'm almost done with triggers (thank goodness I only have a few to create).
It appears UniData only allows one trigger created on a file at a time. Is
this true?
2 Dtademo (0)- LIST-TRIGGER APVENDOR
BEFORE UPDATE TRIGGER: U2.NAMES.BRIDGE.U
BEFORE DELETE TRIGGER: U2.NAMES.BRIDGE.D
2 Dtademo (0)-
I guess I don't understand why this is so hard to fix.
If you can't set up filters in your listserver, 1) set up a free gmail
account, 2) set up a filter to send all the bounce/vacation
autoresponse/error emails to the trash, and 3) forward the remaining emails
to the user group.
Louie Bergsagel
---
Louie Bergsagel has invited you to open a free Gmail account.
To accept this invitation and register for your account, visit
http://mail.google.com/mail/a-79288ca1c7-a300dce4b8-20eb5450d6
Once you create your account, Louie
You are correct -- only one subroutine is allowed - so you have to make sure
it does all the work you want.
-
I'm almost done with triggers (thank goodness I only have a few to create).
It appears UniData only allows one trigger created on a file at a time. Is
this true?
2
At 20:50 +1100 2006/03/16, Mike Preece wrote:
What do people think of the idea of moving this list to a google
group instead?
I would not be adverse to it. Google Groups has multiple digesting
options, both web and e-mail interface, hides the quoted text from
folks that refuse to trim the
Some questions (I have a few sites that have this as an open topic as
well...) I meant to ask earlier, but couldn't figure out if I should Reply
or Reply All (kidding!!)
What was the driving force to move from D3 to UniData?
How difficult was the move - was it all green screen with source
Jerry Banker wrote:
Don't go there. I personally hate, is hate too strong a word,
having to go to a group site to find out what is going on.
From: Mike Preece
What do people think of the idea of moving this list to a google
group instead?
Jerry and others, Google Groups sends e-mail as
All,
The reason I started this thread is
because everyone's opinion matters. However, this thread is taking over
the lists. So, I am going to ask you all, to forward your thoughts to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] instead. Larry and I will go
through it all and see what can/should be done. We'll discuss
At 18:43 + 2006/03/16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interestingly, that gmane site had a posting rate chart (see link below)
which confirms that usage has dropped off. However, you can see that it
did the same last year as well so can't necessarily be attributed to the
list change being
Louie,
This is a bad idea. Actually, it's a
bad idea that's already been tried. Mike Preece already has a (largely
inactive) group on Google. Let's do this in measured steps, people. We
need to take a collective breath.
--
Charles Barouch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Consulting
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -
If the U2UG decides to move the lists to Google Groups, my feelings won't be
hurt a bit. But until then, let's let the group consider it and make an
informed decision, not just run off and start splinter groups all over the
net.
Larry Hiscock
Moderator
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
I would like to make a suggestion. The u2 users list has been in existence
for a LONG time. Currently, the list is managed by the U2 User Group. (Up
until yesterday, I was a member of the u2ug board, but my term expired). I
would suggest that the u2ug board appoint a small team of people to
I wasn't going to vote, because I don't care which way it is (i.e.,
reply to poster vs. reply-all). On the other hand, I _emphatically_
don't care, so I'll vote after all: I don't care.
Which is to say that I'll support, with gratitude, those who maintain
the list whichever way they end up
It seems like this has been the only thing on the list recently, maybe
all the other emails are being sent by replyTIC
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Barouch
Sent: Friday, 17 March 2006 9:01 a.m.
To:
Mike Preece [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do people think of the idea of moving this list to a google
group instead?
Jerry Banker [EMAIL PROTECTED] replied:
Don't go there. I think this was discussed many times and the consensus
was no. I personally hate, is hate too strong a word, having
David,
Here is my test code. This run's fine without the output parameter from
my stored procedure.
**Source code:**
OPTIONS INFORMATION
*
$INCLUDE UNIVERSE.INCLUDE ODBC.H
*
UCMD = ''
*
STATUS = SQLAllocEnv(DBENV)
STATUS = SQLAllocConnect(DBENV,CONENV)
At 15:22 -0500 2006/03/16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My biggest problem with the Useet-style newsgroups is that they are
unmoderated. There is no one to control the content or administer cyber
spankings when appropriate, nor can offensive content be removed.
Not a problem with a Google group.
These are not groups they are echoes of what is being sent to this list.
- Original Message -
From: Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: [U2] Changes to the List
On 3/16/06, Mike Preece [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I too hate going to a site, the list is far preferable.
Vote with Jerry !!
Will someone summarize what this bru ha ha is all about.
grs
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:20
Seconded.
Apologies for posting to the list instead of the moderators but let's all
consider the amount of work a small number of people put in to make this
happen, and whether we personally would be willing to step up and do it
instead of telling them how we'd like them to do it.
-Original
What? Haven't you been getting my emails?
John Cassidy
Unix Sys Admin
DCCCD
u2ug [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/15/06 7:29 PM
All,
We've now been living with the change to the lists for nearly a
month. I'd like to invite opinions on the change. Are we all happy now
that we are used to it?
Hi Bill,
You are correct, Unidata only supports one trigger for both update and delete.
In order to have multiple triggers you need a wrapper program... I can send you
the source if you want.
Regards
Raymond de Bourbon
-Original Message-
From: Bill Haskett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
On 3/16/06, Mike Preece [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been holding back from putting this question, in the hope that the
initiative might come from within U2UG, but it seems high time...
Many, including both Clif and me, were vocal about this change
immediately. I have seen changes like this
Personally I appreciate what ever format works best for those individual
that expend the time to make this thing work.
If I have to do two things instead of one to post to the list or if I have
to shake the cobwebs out of my aged old brain to make it work then even I
will learn how to do it
Raymond:
Thanks. I'm thinking the following ought to do the trick (unless, of
course, I've missed something). :-)
SUBROUTINE U2T.APVENDOR.U (ExecStat, DictFlag, atFILENAME, atID, atRECORD)
** Update trigger for APVENDOR file on UniData
** (C) Copyright 1985-2004, Advantos Systems, Inc. All
Rudy,
Looking at your UV BASIC BCI code and stored procedure, I suggest the
following:
A) I noticed that your stored procedure has 9 arguments, not 8 as you've
defined in your BCI code. You've ommitted the most important one - the
output argument. Isn't that what you're asking about?
B) I
Hi,
The output of list.readu returns the device and inode number of a
Universe file. I can resolve the inode number by using find . -inum
xx, but if I am positioned at / then it is possible that 1 or more
files may have that same inode number, so I want to restrict the find to
the
David:
Answers below.
-Original Message-
From: David Wolverton
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 11:36 AM
To: 'Bill Haskett'; u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] [UD] Triggers
What was the driving force to move from D3 to UniData?
According to our client:
1) They
Do a status against the file in a basic routine, and the device # is 11.
You could write a program to do this and populate a file with the device #,
the inode (field 10), and the full path. At least, that's what I do.
You'll need to run it periodically. Inodes change; creating a new file,
Thanks Dan,
I had thought of that, but as you highlighted the inode and to a far
lesser extent the device number could change. Also this method relies on
me knowing what the file is before hand. I want to know what the file is
from the device and inode. Like a reverse lookup. The only way to
Bill,
Why didn't you stop at Universe?
Why go to Unidata?
Universe has a Pick flavor that runs D3 almost just like D3 runs D3.
Out TAPE.DUMP and TAPE.LOAD programs move all the files in an account
directly from D3 to Universe in two simple steps.
Our UvSpoolerPlus provides a generic Pick
Bill Haskett wrote:
How difficult was the move - was it all green screen with
source code or more difficult?
It wasn't that difficult. The biggest problems were UniData is like
interfacing with Microdata in 1982...it's a time warp! The UniData
environment is excruciatingly tedious and
49 matches
Mail list logo
