[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: dinstall mails

[For more details on this subject, see the logs of bug#17525.]

> > And the original plan, which we will hopefully implement, is to split
> > the *-changes into several different mailing lists:
> > 
> > debian-changes               for stable updates, as currently
> > debian-devel-source-changes  for any source uploads (.orig.tar.gz or .diff.gz)
> > debian-devel-<arch>-changes  for binary (.deb) uploads
> May I suggest debian-devel-changes-<arch> to avoid confusion?

Oops, yes, that was the original suggestion.

> > A binary upload to Architecture: all will be announced to all of the
> > architecture-specific lists.
> Or we could have it as another arch *shrugs*.

No.  (See below.)

> > None of the new lists will inherit the subscribers from any of the
> > current lists, and this will mean that the duplicated emails are
> > irrelevant, as the old debian-devel-changes will simply be shut down.
> Actually, may I suggest keeping -devel-changes and subscribing it to
> each of the new lists? That way the people who want to read everything
> can get everything..

The idea was this.  It is highly unlikely that anyone will be
interested in binary uploads to all of the architectures, and so they
would only need to subscribe to the -changes-<arch> for their one, or
maybe two, architectures.  Since most people will only be interested
in one arch, I would guess, it does not make sense to require them to
subscribe to two lists: -devel-<arch> and -devel-all, for if they
don't subscribe to -devel-all in your scenario, they would miss
certain announcements.  -devel-source would mainly be of interest to
the porters.



            Julian Gilbey             Email: J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
       Dept of Mathematical Sciences, Queen Mary & Westfield College,
                  Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, ENGLAND
      -*- Finger jdg@goedel.maths.qmw.ac.uk for my PGP public key. -*-

Reply to: