Romain Francoise wrote:
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:The debian-release list enforcement policy of politely asking people to stay on topic has worked quite well and hasn't needed any augmentation.Isn't it because the RMs have been asking people to treat -release as a role address? If you discourage discussion on a list, it's bound to see less flames than general discussion lists.
Err, I thought that was what I said...?Anyway, there *is* on-topic discussion on that list, see eg the thread beginning at:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/08/msg00381.html Obviously, though, that discussion is very limited in its scope.I guess for comparison, you could say the role for -devel is "Action items for improving the Debian distribution" to have it fall under a similar "role" sort of heading; though working out who's ultimately responsible would be trickier.
For contrast, the role for -legal is far simpler to come up with ("Helping maintainers and upstream understand licensing issues and come up with licenses that satisfy the DFSG"); yet it gives even -devel a run for its money in the verbose and unproductive stakes.
So, I think the key point is the "discourage off-topic discussion" aspect, not the "role address" point. YMMV, of course.
Cheers, aj