"Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
>
> ... is the cause for this. All the discussion is taking place in the
> master list before the sublists are spawned. You can only express the
> opinion that foo is not bar and never should be so many times.
I agree. I think the trend should be to establish some permanent
sublists, which we're informally leaning towards already. Something
like:
-io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
-subs = ALL sub/method/func issues, like lvalue subs
-strict = ALL lexical/global variable scoping issues
-objects = ALL OO and module issues
-flow = ALL flow/threading issues
-errors = ALL error handling issues
-datetime = ALL date/time/etc issue
The general language list can still be an "else" case. This is already
in place, I'm just proposing these be made permanent, and that the RFC
author choose a sublist for their discussion. General stuff like "chomp
changes" should still go to the main list probably.
If a person doesn't care or trusts others' judgment, they only have to
join those discussions they want to contribute to. If they see a really
juicy RFC come out on perl6-announce, they can always join the sublist
then.
Anyways, that's my input. I don't think topical lists have or will be
effective because, as Bryan notes, most discussions are largely finished
by the time a sublist is created. Plus, with permanent sublists people
can establish a feel for the group and perhaps provide better input.
-Nate
