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

Re: Traffic on fedora-maintainers (Was Re: The community has lost control...)

On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 10:30 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 15:36 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > On 03.06.2007 15:17, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > On Sunday 03 June 2007 02:48:35 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > >> Well, see all those discussion that happened when ACLs were added, kjoi
> > >> introduced, the freezes were introduced and bodi put in place. Sure,
> > >> there are always discussions, but all those were quite worse and there
> > >> was a lot of confusion afaics... Don't read fedora-maintainers for a
> > >> week and suddenly you are not aware of how to build or push a package.
> > > So without reading the mailing list for maintainers,
> > 
> > A low-traffic fedora-maintainers-announce was requested multiple times
> > as some contributors mentioned that fedora-maintainers is to noisy for
> > them. Some Red-Hat-engineers blocked that so long and hard that people
> > that wanted it got frustrated and didn't drive that idea further in the
> > past months.
> > 
> > Like it or not, but for some people fedora-maintainers has to much
> > traffic; so they just skim over it and easily miss important announcements.
> The problem is that -maintainers was supposed to cut down on the traffic
> from -devel.[1]
The crux is procedures, workflow, fixes, changes, bux, hacks, tricks
etc. to release management, buildsystem etc. which affect all
maintainers ATM or RSN.

I don't think the public devel@ list is appropriate for this.

devel@ could be appropriate for discussions on development of a "future
release management system" and similar.

> It's a sucky problem, but I really don't think more lists is the
> answer :-/  Instead, better and more consistent use of our existing
> lists.
Right, but cf. what I wrote above.


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