Re: new-maintainer related mailing lists hosting + Debian lists search engine problems
- To: Dale Scheetz <email@example.com>
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: new-maintainer related mailing lists hosting + Debian lists search engine problems
- From: Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 10:33:18 +0100
- Message-id: <20000502103318.B1046@polya>
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1000427225626.14344B-100000@dwarf>; from firstname.lastname@example.org on Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 11:06:34PM +0000
- References: <20000427224428.A6257@polya> <Pine.LNX.3.96.1000427225626.14344B-100000@dwarf>
On Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 11:06:34PM +0000, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > Should -nm-admin be called something like -nm-private (or
> > -newmaint-private) and be accessible to developers only, to be used
> > only for discussing personal information? That would leave
> > -nm-discuss for public issues such as the nm process itself or
> > questions of how to confirm identity.
> You have had my answer at least three times today, and several times in
> the past.
OK, I get the point ;-)
> To keep the process open, all traffic on nm-admin is CC'd to nm-discuss.
> Anyone can subscribe to nm-discuss and see exactly what is going on in the
> AM discussion. They can even make suggestions about how that process is
> going without interrupting the conversation between the AMs. These
> suggestions do not go unnoticed by the AMs as some of us keep tabs on this
> list either through subscription or by looking at the archives.
> This provides an adequate feedback mechanism; open communication of all
> the actions taken by the AMs; and a degree of quiet for the AMs actual
> working conversations.
> If you can't see the advantages of this arrangement, then I don't know
> what else I can say to you. <whine, whine, whine>
OK, I see your point; just that I am one of the group who subscribes
to both and currently doesn't see the difference. But I guess that as
the profile of the nm lists grows, this will become more significant
> My vote is to maintain the exact structure we currently have with the nm-*
> lists. In any case I am completely opposed to any private and closed list
> arrangements for New Maintainer.
> If you can find a way to live within those constraints I will gladly
> accept your help in making the arrangements.
I'll make the request. I'm not sure how the listmasters will arrange
it, but I will ask for precisely this arrangement.
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/