Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-dev-announce list
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 16:20:07
Message-Id: 44A159E4.9010107@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-dev-announce list by Stuart Herbert
Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On 6/25/06, Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> wrote: >> This topic has come up in the past, and I'd like to revive it once >> again. The gentoo-dev list has gotten a lower and lower signal to noise >> ratio over the past year or two, and it's difficult to dig out the stuff >> that's truly required reading. > > What's noise to you is signal to others. For example, my interest is > servers, so all of your X.org posts are mostly noise to me, but to > others it's essential signal. Same goes for the scientific re-org > recently discussed. And I'm sure the same goes for PHP & webapp > stuff.
Exactly. More stuff you don't care about is more noise. I agree with that too. Rather than reading 50 posts about X crap, wouldn't you rather just look at a single announcement?
>> I propose that all need-to-know announcements and decisions be posted to >> a separate, moderated (or restricted posting) gentoo-dev-announce list >> to ensure that no developers lose track of what really matters. > > I think a -dev-announce ML is a good idea, with reply-to set to -dev. > But I also think you're over-exaggerating the situation by a long way, > sorry.
I'm glad you have your opinion. I don't have the time to sit and browse through all the arguments between 2-3 people that go on for 50-100 posts or more as they fall more and more off-topic, so I would like to know if there's any conclusion without wasting my time on that. My options are either missing important announcements or creating this list. I would prefer the list. Thanks, Donnie

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: gentoo-dev-announce list Ryan Hill <dirtyepic.sk@×××××.com>