I think the concern is more so that the content (mathematical algorithms) is outside the scope of interest of the Commons in general, while the discussions concerning package design are interesting to commons in general. This is much in the same way that the Http protocol discussions of HttpClient were too subject specific to be of interest of Commons and thus a new list was spawned for that subject matter.
From what I remember HttpClient was granted a dedicated list purely based on the high level of traffic. I cannot see any real benefits of creating new lists purely on this basis (apart from the bandwidth saved, though if this is a concern you would probably be receiving digest mails or use gmane).
"Commons Math Developers" would be a list where discussion about internal algorithm issues can be discussed without the huge amounts of email we generate in the process getting dumped into the commons developer list and requiring filtering by everyone else.
Of course we would promote that many Commons Developers actually join both lists and it still would be highly promoted that issues concerning the interaction of math with other Commons components be discussed on the Commons Developer list directly.
This means we have automatically complicated the interaction between Math developers and their community. I just see this as another layer of unnecessary indirection.
Its a tough call, I'm not quite convinced theres enough [math] activity yet (even though I opened up the discussion). I fact, there was a long period in the fall where we didn't open any new discussions about math.
My reason for commenting on this thread is to see if we can identify a real problem rather than segregating projects from the community.
-John K
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
