At 04:51 PM 10/10/00 -0700, Daniel Chetlin wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 08:23:07PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > Having had cause to root around in the archives of perl6 and perl5 lists,
> > can I suggest that we use the system that perl5-porters is archived on in
> > preference to the system that the perl6 lists use (MHonArc, apparently).
> > Personally I found the threaded summaries and search facility on the perl5
> > archive much more effective. What do other people think?
>
>Er, compared to what the perl6 lists are doing right now anything is
>preferable. But xray _sucks_! Given the choice between searching xray
>and chewing tinfoil, I might choose the tinfoil.
I'm trying to get them on a regular crawl schedule at work (I work for
Northern Light, one of the search engines) but that's a spotty thing at the
moment. (Soon, though, I hope... :)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
