Heiko, Have noticed you are liberally deleting the UX-Advise ML recipient from BZ META issues and some topical issues. Is there a reason?
While these issues may have had their Keyword "needUXEval" removed (or not assigned) use of the UX-Advise ML remains an efficient way to route the BZ comments to the UX and Design team. Every BZ issue you remove it from deletes that topic from visibility by the team. And folks have to manually add themselves to an issue should they desire to follow along--which for most of the META we do. It costs nothing to keep the ML recipient in place (personally with mail rule filters I route all the UX-Design related mail out of my inbox to a mail folder where they can be reviewed while I am thinking about LibreOffice). If with discussion there is some consensus to do this, I'll concede--but my personal preference is to leave the ML in place for the META and topical issues in BZ. Folks that find the volume too high can take the ML as digest or even remove themselves from the ML. Stuart _______________________________________________ Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise
