On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:13:59PM -0800, Jan Dubois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 09 Dec 2004, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > > I see a real use for having a list to coordinate those contributing to > > development of libwin32, and would prefer that this not be tied to > > ActiveState (since I don't necessarily think this distribution will be > > maintained by ActiveState employees or users exclusively or forever). > > Does anyone have information on how to request a list on perl.org > > (since asking Ask doesn't seem to have worked)? > > I completely agree that we should set up a perl-libwin32 mailing list, > and as I said before, I don't care where it is being hosted. But I > would like to point out that hosting a mailing list at ActiveState does > in no way imply that its content is exclusively managed by ActiveState. > See for example the perl-xml mailing list. > > Anyways, if a perl.org list hasn't been set up by January, then I will > ask the ASPN team to set one up at ActiveState.com to get things started. > (I'll be gone for the rest of the month starting Monday). > > Cheers, > -Jan > > PS: Is there any specific reason for your general negative attitude > towards ActiveState, and is there anything I can do to about it?
I have several reasons for preferring a perl.org list, none of them major: I want to get everyone who's worked on the cygwin libwin32 package to join in, and can't guarantee that all of them have no negative attitude towards "native" windows stuff (and by extension ActiveState). (Right now discussions take place on a mixture of p5p, cygwin at cygwin.org, cygwin-perl at yahoogroups.com, privately, and perhaps elsewhere.) Being based at ActiveState creates an impression of bias toward the native win32 perl. I've been impressed with the delivery speed/subjective reliability of perl.org lists. And some may appreciate the nntp access. Don't know the same about ActiveState. (Don't know to the contrary either.) But if the list ends up hosted by activestate, so be it.
