On 4/25/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, I considered doing that... but as my proposal was specifically *for* > the community, I felt it important to put the most number of eyeballs on > it as possible. > > You know, perhaps we need *three* mailing lists... one for devs, one for > users who just want questions answered, and one for the "community", those > that want to be involved in shaping things but that aren't committers. :)
[...] > I guess this is one way that I've never quite "got it", as Craig says :) > I view the community as being larger than just those contributing. While > I have no problem affording something "more" to those that contribute, I > think those simply using the product have a stake in it. They can of > course choose to ignore that stake, but they can exercise interest if they > wish. > > For me, the community would be "anyone who has an active interest in how > the project develops". There! You've said it. That exactly describes the purpose of the dev@ list. So, now, why again do we need the three lists you mention above? ;-) -- Martin Cooper
