Re: [Debconf-team] Why do we have two lists for debconf-team ?
On 11/03/13 17:16, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 09:45:58PM +0100, Raphaël Walther wrote:
I don't think it is good for us to have two lists serving the same
purpose. I don't remember exactly what was the idea behind creating a
separate list but I'd suggest to drop one of them.
Any thoughts ?
The original motivation was to have a mailing list where we could begin
discussing DC14 planning while DC13 was still under way. I think this is a
good idea in general.
Now that DC13 is over, the focus on both lists will be DC14, so it may make
sense to have everyone on a single debconf-team list. However, I have no
idea if everyone who's subscribed to debconf14-team has also subscribed to
debconf-team. Furthermore, as we're going through DC14 organization, I'm
I, one random dude in Portland, am not subscribed to debconf-team.
I thought debconf14-team was "the mailing list for organizing DebConf14",
and since I wanted to help out in some varying capacity, I subscribed to it.
I didn't even notice debconf-team until a few days ago, and if there was any
DebConf14-related content send exclusively to that list, I have missed it.
Here is my suggestion:
* Mothball 'debconf-team' going forward --- maybe use for DebConfN<14
topics, but no longer for DebConf14.
* Use 'debconf14-team' for all DebConf14 related work.
* When it's time to start discussing DebConfXX in the future,
create the corresponding debconfXX-team list.
* Return to using 'debian-portland-soc' for announcing meetups at
the Lucky Lab and other social activities not related to DebConf14.
W.r.t. the last point, the duplicate emails are annoying. If one wants to
attract DebConf14 participation from people subscribing to debian-portland-soc
in the future (all 1 of them, maybe), then stick an advert in the welcome-
-to-the-list message.
-m
Reply to: