Goodbye, Fedora (Limiting -devel to maintainers/contributers/etc?)
Gilboa Davara
gilboad at gmail.com
Wed Feb 21 15:32:21 UTC 2007
On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 10:15 -0500, Warren Togami wrote:
> Gilboa Davara wrote:
> >
> > Unless I'm mistaken, the original idea was that -devel members has to be
> > sponsored before given rw rights.
> > Being a fedora developer and/or an active -extras maintainer will just
> > speed things up.
>
> No. fedora-devel-list was originally meant to be developer discussion
> only. End-user support does not belong here at all. Unfortunately,
> this list has been increasingly failing us for a few reasons:
>
> - "developer discussion" is a gray area
> - policing is a manual process of constant vigilance. Effort today
> leaves no lasting effects in a few days.
Ouch. Bad phrasing on my side.
I meant: A couple of of months ago it was suggest that the -devel ML
will become semi-closed - pushing the public debates into a newly formed
ML.
>
> What if more list members helped in the policing, making it an actively
> hostile place for end-users to post support questions? I dunno...
Personally, I can live with support questions.
However, politics, flame-wars and the occasional troll makes my skin
crawl.
>
> >
> > I'm not saying that -devel should be limited to RH/FC/Extras members
> > -only-, I am saying that something must be done to improve the
> > signal-to-noise ratio.
> >
>
> fedora-maintainers was created as an invite only list for this purpose.
> The signal to noise ratio is a bit better there. I am personally fine
> with inviting anybody with cvsextras access, or who has done something
> substantive in infrastructure or docs to that list.
/+1
I'm suggesting that -devel should mirror this behavior.
(AFAIK maintainers is for packaging/cvs/extras/etc questions/problems -
IMHO a similar ML should be created for development/long-term
discussions)
>
> Warren Togami
> wtogami at redhat.com
- Gilboa
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list