I tend to be someone who automatically looks for trends, and the nice thing about having just one list is that it lets me know where people are having problems. Judging by the number of questions we get, one of the biggest challenges for inexperienced rsync users is knowing why a particular file is included or excluded. Way in the back of my mind I see a need for an option that, for every file included or excluded, says which rule was used to make the decision. Nice and simple.
I think if the product is easy enough to use and the documentation is good enough, then one list should be fine, because the volume should be low. Getting lots of repetitions of similar questions is an indication that there are usability issues with the product. In fact, if someone has some time on their hands, it would be a fun project to pour over a year's worth of email and do a Pareto chart on the questions we've gotten. (A good undergraduate research paper topic, perhaps?) Right away such a chart would suggest development activities we could implement to improve the usability. So I'm neutral/mildly-opposed to splitting. But if we do split, don't call it "rsync-technical". Call it "rsync-devel" or similar. I think one of the reasons samba gets non-development email on samba-technical is that the name doens't give a clue as to what the list is about. Thanks PG -- Paul Green, Senior Technical Consultant, Stratus Computer, Inc. Voice: +1 978-461-7557; FAX: +1 978-461-3610; Video on request. Speaking from Stratus not for Stratus -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html