Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:44:08
Message-Id: 4C433D4F.1090209@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC by "Petteri Räty"
1 Petteri Räty wrote:
2 > On 07/18/2010 05:21 PM, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
3 >
4 >> Hi,
5 >>
6 >> Theo Chatzimichos<tampakrap@g.o>:
7 >>
8 >>
9 >>> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer
10 >>> <fauli@g.o> wrote:
11 >>>
12 >>>> What about getting rid of -project?
13 >>>>
14 >>>> V-Li
15 >>>>
16 >>> WHAT? Why??
17 >>>
18 >> Because it is useless in my eyes. All discussion could also take
19 >> place here and most people mix it up anyway. The distinction is too
20 >> blurry.
21 >>
22 >> V-Li
23 >>
24 >>
25 > The "tone in gentoo" etc threads recently belonged to gentoo-project.
26 > Those threads are usually the ones that grow the longest. If people want
27 > those on gentoo-dev then gentoo-project is not needed. Granted most of
28 > the time the list is not that active but so are many other mailing lists
29 > we have. I don't think this is something we should have on the council
30 > agenda without the issues having had it's own thread (on gentoo-project
31 > according to current rules).
32 >
33 > Regards,
34 > Petteri
35 >
36 >
37
38 It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for
39 them to just go away. Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers
40 on the vine and nothing much happens. There may be a need for -project
41 but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending
42 threads to it. Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to
43 -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see
44 the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised.
45
46 Dale
47
48 :-) :-)

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>