François TOURDE wrote:
Le 12387ième jour après Epoch, hereon1@fastmail.us écrivait:Since many questions in the debian-laptop list are user oriented questions, I thought it would be helpful to the Debian community to ensure the readers here are aware of the following message I just sent to the debian-user list. RFC: Create d-user-woody, d-user-sarge maillists, deactivate d-userI think that create a d-u-stable and d-u-testing is a good idea for distrib level specific questions, but deactivating d-u is a bad idea. How can people be aware that a question is level specific? I think that d-u is good for general questions. About d-u-unstable, I'm not sure a ML is a good idea. Why not using devel, so close to unstable? And inform non-devel user of the unstable distrib that it is a bad idea to use unstable if they are not aware of the BTS and other tools ? My 2¢.
Hi I think this is a espially bad idea: my reasons for thinking so:1) the direction of unstable users to devel ml and BTS only will increase the (unecesary/not correctly addressed) traffic there from useres that think they know what to do....because if the users knew what they where doing the traffic would not be there... 2) even if you know what you are doing, you sometimes will have user-specific questions (for example configuration problems with some specific package or hw) 3) with the current setup it is possible for useres of stable installation to profit from the knowlege of the (mayby) more expirienced users of unstable, and for the userers of unstable installations to profit from the expirience/knowlege of users running stable installations in professional enviroments
and for testing/stable splitting: i think this will cause extra confusion arround the release of sarge as stable (and for future stable releases....)
so, my opinion is that the current setup, while certanly not perfect, it is a quite good solution...
yours, Albert