FYI - UNIX is about 10-12 years old by the time Matt is describing - there
are thousands of sites by then.
I was describing what it was like when it 30-50 sites.
Clem
ᐧ
On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 2:39 PM segaloco via TUHS <tuhs(a)tuhs.org> wrote:
At least as far as I can glean from manuals, there is
the "trouble"
command circa UNIX/TS 4.0 which was "a front end for the Piscataway Change
Management Tracking System (CMTS)".
This was used to report issues over uucp to Piscataway where they would
then be transformed into Modification Requests, examples of which in the
form of the request form *and* a list of 1980-1983 changes are in Sys V
literature I've scanned.
The utility would request:
- The user name
- Their location
- Phone number
- Type of request: Hardware, software, documentation, enhancement, and
unknown
- System: Product in need of support (usually unix)
- Release (can be N/A)
- Severity: 1 - highest 4 - lowest
- Date
- Abstract/Summary
- Detailed Description
There is a note here too that unless stated otherwise, reports may be
selected for publication in the "Mini-System Newsletter".
I've never heard of this Mini-System Newsletter. It sounds like among
other things it had a digest of significant trouble reports to notify the
network of known issues.
The UNIX System Error Message Manual refers to two "Support Organizations"
in the Bell system:
- Field service representatives that support the hardware
- Local software support and "UNIX System Customer Service"
The manual goes on to mention the preferred group for many of the errors
encounterable
I suppose this means there was usually a local guru pertinent to the type
of machinery (PDP, VAX, 3B-20) and then maybe some local software folks and
then the man support group.
Looks like for BTL-specific extensions, Division 452 was point of contact
on that one. In the notes for the Release 5.0 manuals (troff comments) Lab
The System V modification request form lists "UNIX System Support Center"
in Lisle, Illinois as the point of contact for these forms.
The 4.0 documentation roadmap mentions getting documentation resources
from the Computer Information Service Library.
The 5.0 BTL-specific manual has a second trouble page listing "UNIX
Computer Center Support" instead of Piscataway as the recipient of trouble
reports.
In the same manual is also "wwbmail", an application that would send help
requests directly to the "Writers Workbench" group. I haven't checked
this
manual exhaustively yet so there could be other nuggets in there.
Of course, going back in the history of UNIX, in the early days, man pages
listed the application author/maintainer with the implication they should
be directly contacted with questions. This changed in V3 I think, which is
around the time SCCS would've been playing around with what would become
CB-UNIX. I dunno when USG and the PWB groups first formally start to tinker
on things, but I recall reading around 1973 being a likely backstop. I
assume USG handled a lot of this traffic until the 80s and the
formalization of a bunch of these other groups.
So all in all from various manuals, this is the picture I can glean from
early 80s:
Support Groups:
- USG Proper
- UNIX System Customer Service
- UNIX System Support Center
- UNIX Computer Center Support
- Piscataway (USG? PWB?)
- WWB Direct Mailing List
Documentation:
- Computer Information Service Library
- Might be the same group but there is a trifold (I can't find right
now) that lists the User's Manual along with the two falling blocks guides
circa UNIX/TS 4.0 that could be requested from some doc group
- Various labs and divisions that maintained their own manual versions
- Mini-System Newsletter
Granted, this is all based on manuals, doesn't consider any activities of
USENIX or what BSD folks were doing for their help and support. Hopefully I
haven't misrepresented anything, happy to illuminate any references that
may be dubious.
- Matt G.
------- Original Message -------
On Wednesday, February 8th, 2023 at 10:58 AM, Will Senn <
will.senn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Today, as I was tooling around on stack overflow, I decided to ask a
question on meta. For those of you who don't know, stack overflow is
supposedly a q&a site. There are zillions of answers to quite a few "how to
do i do x" style questions. Folks upvote and downvote the answers and the
site is a goto for a lot of developers. I've used it since it came online -
back in the late 2000's. I have a love hate relationship with the site.
When there's a good answer to a question that I have, I love it. When they
downvote fringe cases that I care about to the point where they effectively
become gray literature that is near on impossible to locate - I hate it.
Meta is supposedly where you go to ask questions about the stack.
Yesterday, I asked this question:
Do you know of any studies that have been done around downvoted content,
specifically on stack overflow or stack exchange?
By way of background - I find any questions or answers that are on the
border (+1, 0, -1) as dubiously helpful, but when the downvotes pile up,
much like upvotes, the answers become interesting to me again as they give
me insights I might miss otherwise.
After a slew of why would you think that was interesting, there's no value
with upvotes and downvotes, and your question is unclear responses along
with, as of now, 31 downvotes net, the question was closed for lack of
clarity. My answer, which was informed by some of the comments was:
There don't appear to be any papers on downvoting specific to Stack
Overflow. You can find a good list of known academic papers using Stack
Exchange data in the list hosted on Stack Exchange Meta (link). It is an
attempt to keep a current list of works up to date.
The Stack Exchange Data Explorer (link) is an open API for doing data
research, if you want to dig into the data yourself.
Which was quickly downvoted 9 times net.
To see the entire debacle:
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/423080/are-there-any-serious-studi…
Anyhow, other than what I perceive to be a decidely hostile environment
for asking questions, it is still actually a useful resource.
Wow, have times changed though on the hostility front.
So, it got me thinking...
What was it like in the very beginning of things (well, ok, maybe not the
very beginning, but around and after the advent of v6 and when it was at or
around 50 sites) for folks needing answers to questions related to unix?
The questions... and for the love of Pete, don't downvote me anymore
today, I'm a fragile snowflake, and I might just cry...
What was the mechanism - phone, email, dropbox of questions, snail mail,
saint bernardnet, what?
What was the mood - did folks quickly tire of answering questions and get
snippy, or was it all roses?
When did those individual inquiries get too much and what change was made
to aggregate things?
I'm thinking there may have been overlap between unix users and usenet...
Also, I remember using fidonet for some of my early question about linux,
but that was 1991, many years after the rise of unix.
Thanks,
Will