general mailing list reorganization? (was Re: RFC: fedora-devel-announce)
Warren Togami
wtogami at redhat.com
Thu Jun 7 12:44:01 UTC 2007
Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 06.06.2007 23:01, Brian Pepple wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 15:04 -0400, Warren Togami wrote:
>>> Christopher Blizzard wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 14:05 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>>>> *shrug* I'll give this a +1. Although if discussion goes to
>>>>> 'fedora-devel'
>>>>> one wonders what the usefulness of fedora-maintainers will start to
>>>>> be?
>>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I don't get this. fedora-maintainers is pretty useful - high
>>>> signal, low crap. The proper reaction to things like this is almost
>>>> never _another_ mailing list.
>>>>
>>> It is pretty useful if you have the time to follow all the posts and
>>> read everything. It is wrong-minded however to expect everyone with
>>> lesser commitments to be able to read and follow everything on a busy
>>> discussion list. For them, they could opt to follow minimally
>>> fedora-devel-announce.
>>>
>>> I'm half-decided on if fedora-devel-announce then kill
>>> fedora-maintainers. fedora-maintainers has the benefit of having a
>>> significantly better signal to noise ratio than fedora-devel-list.
>>> There is however a detriment to the redundancy.
>>>
>>> If folks were willing to be more MILITANT AND CONSISTENT in enforcing
>>> the "devel only" rules for fedora-devel-list I might be happier about
>>> killing fedora-maintainers. But consistent enforcement has proven to be
>>> impossible to maintain in the past.
>>>
>>> We should talk about this issues in tomorrow's FESCO meeting.
>> I've added it to the schedule.
>
> Killing fedora-maintainers is part of the plan for the mailing list
> reorganization the Board put on my plate months ago. The hardware for
> that was promised for mid April. :-( Mike, any update when something
> really happens?
>
> BTW, I agree with the fedora-devel-announce idea as something like that
> was part of the mailing list reorganization as well. But if the hardware
> for that is not that far away (e.g. less then one month) I'd say we
> create that on the new hardware directly.
>
Are we past the <non-technical blocker> of running our own mail server?
Warren
More information about the Fedora-maintainers
mailing list