# Ruby-talk, comp.lang.ruby, ruby-talk-google **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [September 5, 2006, 5:27pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-talk-comp-lang-ruby-ruby-talk-google/67612 "2006-09-05T17:27:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/2acd7d/32.png) [@phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/phrogz)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 5:27pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-talk-comp-lang-ruby-ruby-talk-google/67612/1 "2006-09-05T17:27:03Z")
Where does the third fit into the equation? I browse ruby-talk via the comp.lang.ruby group on Google G… Barring gateway troubles, I think I see posts by everyone on the mailing list. When I post via comp.lang.ruby, I see my posts being archived in the ruby-talk archive, appearing in ruby-talk-google, and being responded to by those I know use the mailing list. So it looks to me like ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby are syncing well (on the whole). Why is there a “ruby-talk-google” group on google, whose description states: “This is a mirror list of the offical ruby-talk mailing list. It serves as a replacement for the old mail\<-\>news gateway (comp.lang.ruby). It exists to provide access to the mailing list via the convenience of Google G. web-based client. (272 members)” Is it somehow more reliable? Should I be using that instead of comp.lang.ruby? ---
**Author:** ![phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/2acd7d/32.png) [@phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/phrogz)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 5:41pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-talk-comp-lang-ruby-ruby-talk-google/67612/2 "2006-09-05T17:41:37Z")
Phrogz wrote: > It > exists to provide access to the mailing list via the convenience of > Google G. web-based client. (272 members)" I think this is the answer, here. Someone wanted easy access via a Google app and create it. > Is it somehow more reliable? Should I be using that instead of > comp.lang.ruby? Plenty of people use comp.lang.ruby daily, and it actually seems to be a bit more reliable than ruby-forum (in my limited experience), so I don’t think you need to bother switching. I think the whole ‘replacement’ bit was someone trying to make it sound more important than it is. If you’re really worried about ‘reliability’, the mailing list is pretty much the main method here, so that would be the way to go. Having said all that, I still use ruby-forum because it’s more convenient for me. ---
**Author:** ![phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/2acd7d/32.png) [@phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/phrogz)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 6:42pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-talk-comp-lang-ruby-ruby-talk-google/67612/3 "2006-09-05T18:42:05Z")
Phrogz wrote: > whose description states: > > “This is a mirror list of the offical ruby-talk mailing list. It serves > as a replacement for the old mail\<-\>news gateway (comp.lang.ruby). It > exists to provide access to the mailing list via the convenience of > Google G. web-based client. (272 members)” > > Is it somehow more reliable? Should I be using that instead of > comp.lang.ruby? Hi– I set this up the last time the gateway went down. At that time it looked like the gateway was going to stay down for good. I prefer the Google G. interface so I set up ruby-talk-google to ensure that capability. Of course, the gateway was eventually restored thanks to the hard work James Edward G. II and friends. So now ruby-talk-google isn’t absolutely neccessary, but it does serve as a backup in case the gateway ever goes down again. And it doesn’t really matter which one you use, since ruby-talk-google just fowards all posts to ruby-talk and vice-versa. T. ---
**Author:** ![phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/2acd7d/32.png) [@phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/phrogz)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 10:26pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-talk-comp-lang-ruby-ruby-talk-google/67612/4 "2006-09-05T22:26:29Z")
On 9/5/06, Phrogz [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Where does the third fit into the equation? > > I browse ruby-talk via the comp.lang.ruby group on Google G… > Barring gateway troubles, I think I see posts by everyone on the > mailing list. When I post via comp.lang.ruby, I see my posts being > archived in the ruby-talk archive, appearing in ruby-talk-google, and > being responded to by those I know use the mailing list. > > So it looks to me like ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby are syncing well > (on the whole). Hmmmm. I wasn’t aware of the connection between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby Is that why posts appear here whose authors seem oblivious to the ruby-talk audience? If a posting is cross-posted to comp.lang.ruby and other groups like comp.lang.python, or comp.lang.c++ is that information stripped out by whatever gateway links ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby? ## Just curious. Rick DeNatale My blog on Ruby [http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/](http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/) ---
**Author:** ![phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/2acd7d/32.png) [@phrogz](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/phrogz)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 8:44pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-talk-comp-lang-ruby-ruby-talk-google/67612/5 "2006-09-06T20:44:49Z")
On 9/5/06, Rick DeNatale [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Is that why posts appear here whose authors seem oblivious to the > ruby-talk audience? If a posting is cross-posted to comp.lang.ruby > and other groups like comp.lang.python, or comp.lang.c++ is that > information stripped out by whatever gateway links ruby-talk and > comp.lang.ruby? Yup. -austin