Hi Mark, On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 14:46 +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > Hi Christian, > > On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 13:56 +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote: > > What would help the problem a lot is if debates go more into specific > > sublists instead of going onto desktop-devel. One of the main reasons > > for this is that for many sub-projects the relevant maintainers are not > > on the relevant lists. I find it kinda pathetic for instance that > > someone who proclaims himself Lord of the Theme is either not subscribed > > to or at least have never posted to the gnome-themes list, and through > > that is forcing theme discussions onto desktop-devel. Similar problems > > for other sub-projects, which together collate into desktop-devel > > getting flooded. > > That's a given, but I do find it understandable that when a list > becomes as dead as gnome-themes-list is, people naturally move away from > using it. Part of fixing the desktop-devel-list problem should involve > re-vitalising those other lists, but ... Why is this understandable? The volume on librsvg-devel is about maybe 2 mails a month. That doesn't mean that Caleb and Dom either not stay subscribed or ignore messages on it.
> > Maintainers actually being part of the subproject they pretend to > > maintain instead of screaming murder on 'global' lists would do more > > for this problem I think than lots of 'shut up' messages sent to > > desktop-devel or gnome-hackers. > > ... lets not kid ourselves - we don't want to just split up the volume > of mail amongst many lists, we want to solve the social problems that > make it difficult for hackers to have clear lines of communication. Splitting the volume would mostly solve the problem as each of us would not get all messages on all topics. Just the messages relating to the topics we are subscribed too. Maybe some subtopic's still needs people showing mailing restraint, but that it not so easy to judge before the mails actually go to relevant lists. > To give an analogy - if this was a BOF at GUADEC, we started talking > about themes and everyone started shouting their opinion, it wouldn't be > long before someone stood up an shut the thing down. That person > wouldn't tell everyone who wanted to talk about themes to go to another > room. He'd either gather the stakeholders together in the hallway and > have the discussion or make it very clear that people need to restrain > themselves. Can't see how this analogy is analogical of anything related to this discussion. The problem is not the themes BOF discussing themes, its about discussing themes (and other topics) in the BOF meant for discussing cross-module cooperation. If we look at the separate topics being discussed on desktop-devel, I think that if we look at the issue over a year there is no topic that is 'overdiscussed', the problem is that they tend to 'all' get discussed on desktop-devel undermining the real purpose of desktop devel. > (Also, its not hard to see that its really Seth's "I am Lord of the > Theme" mail that you have a problem with here - better to just sort that > issue out than clouding this one.) No, its more Seth providing me with a perfect example of why we have these problems through his actions. Anyway I have stated my opinion on this subject and will leave it at this. Think I have made my point, and if I haven't I probably will continue failing to do so by further mails. Christian _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list