Re: Summary of the debian-devel BoF at Debconf9
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Michael Banck<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> at Debconf9, there was a BoF about the debian-devel list and how we
> could possibly make it more attractive.
Was this recorded (I can't find it in the initial video release)?
> * Reconsider CCs
> Regarding CCs, it was hightlighted that the current list conduct
> explicitely says (since a short while ago) people should refrain from
> complaining about CCs on-list and do this privately. Further discussion
> made clear that most of the people present might consider getting CCed a
> small nuisance, but consider discussions about this much more
> disrupting. Furthermore, some people actually like being CCed on
> things, though maybe more to attract their attention to threads they
> would otherwise not read (and not as direct replies to them).
I've noticed the on-list whining about CCs has dropped off
dramatically since the policy was changed. However, I still get CCed
> * Maybe split off WNPP Traffic to a new -wnpp list?
> The other discussed item was about ITPs. It turned out that roughly 20%
> of the debian-devel list traffic are ITPs and discussions thereof.
> While it is clear that ITPs should get reviewed, maybe not all of them
> have to be copied to -devel. It was suggested that for mass-filings
> (sometimes people file the ITP for a dozen perl libraries needed as
> Build-Depends/Depends for a package in one go), something less-intrusive
> could be used, maybe perhaps a summary posting. Another option is that
> specific teams like the perl or the games teams review ITPs in their
> field, while only generic ITPs get copied to -devel.
The list already exists, but it recieves all traffic from all wnpp
bugs and is therefore rather high-traffic:
So if ITP/O/RFA are to be split out, a new list might need to be
created. I also wonder how they are to be split out, IIRC currently
the only reason they are sent there is because of reportbug setting
X-Debbugs-CC on ITP mails. I guess reportbug could cease that practice
for ITP bugs, I do wonder how many folks add it manually due to
established convention though. Agreed about the mass-filings.
Personally I find ITP mails on debian-devel useful.