Talk:tin (newsreader)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Relative Popularity of Newsreaders (Notability)[edit]

Popularity in itself is irrelevant here, except as it helps establish notability and influences editorial bias.

There appear to be no quantitative surveys. A Google count last night for each of tin, trn, nn and slrn combined with "newsreader" showed the first three roughly comparable, with slrn trailing. Here are the counts as of this writing (for the [text based] newsreaders):

284,000	tin newsreader
47,300	trn newsreader (however, trn is known to overlap with rn...)
269,000	rn newsreader
300,000	nn newsreader
95,900	slrn newsreader
202,000	Gnus newsreader

Of course these numbers will change over time, and are subject to the usual caveats regarding web searches. But they do tend to support the argument that tin is notable Tedickey 12:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Influence of one Newsreader on Another[edit]

For gauging influence, we need references. tin's change history (relative to trn and nnn, etc), is much clearer since the changelog is dated. While reviewing trn and nn, I find that trn sources have no changelog. The nn sources are not much better - they contain no dates. Furthermore, reading term.c and some comments in the changelog, I am reminded of a long-ago email conversation where some of the work I did for tin influenced the design in this area - but the changelog is not detailed enough to point out where the features came from - and tin is nowhere mentioned in the sources Tedickey 12:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]