On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 02:20:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > the lists should also be archived in the usual ways. having search > functions (on the web?) would be a good addition. development lists many > times will note an idea early on and forget it later. i have refound > some good nuggets by looking through old email. Having had cause to root around in the archives of perl6 and perl5 lists, can I suggest that we use the system that perl5-porters is archived on in preference to the system that the perl6 lists use (MHonArc, apparently). Personally I found the threaded summaries and search facility on the perl5 archive much more effective. What do other people think? Nicholas Clark
- Re: Continued RFC process Simon Cozens
- Re: Continued RFC process Dave Storrs
- Re: Continued RFC process Simon Cozens
- Re: Continued RFC process Russ Allbery
- Re: Continued RFC process Stephen Zander
- RE: Continued RFC process David Grove
- Re: Continued RFC process Peter Buckingham
- Re: Continued RFC process Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Continued RFC process Russ Allbery
- Re: Continued RFC process Uri Guttman
- Re: Continued RFC process Nicholas Clark
- Re: Continued RFC process Daniel Chetlin
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- RE: Continued RFC process David Grove
- RE: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Simon Cozens
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Simon Cozens
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Nathan Torkington
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski