Hi, If the volume on the sandbox lists is very low, or expected to very low, I think the additional cross-pollination benefit of keeping the people interested in sandbox discussions on the main lists outweighs the additional distribution costs. The [EMAIL PROTECTED] would eb the exception, as it's not a human discussion thing really: I'd set up that address, but keep what would be [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] on the main [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] lists.
This is just an indication of preferences, not a strong opinion, much less a -1. If people really want sandbox lists, I don't mind... Yoav On 1/26/06, Curt Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mark Womack and I discussed setting up mailing lists for the sandbox > to host discussions on experimental projects that don't align with > the existing subprojects and specifically using it as a forum to > discuss requirements, approaches and feasibility for a JavaScript > project. > > In addition, the logging/sandbox SVN is currently configured to send > commit messages to an non-existent [EMAIL PROTECTED] > mailing list. > > Any comments on setting up a sandbox-dev and sandbox-cvs/snv/commit > mailing list? > > Begin forwarded message: > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: January 24, 2006 4:57:51 PM CST > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: failure notice > > > > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at apache.org. > > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following > > addresses. > > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) > -- Yoav Shapira System Design and Management Fellow MIT Sloan School of Management Cambridge, MA, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.yoavshapira.com
