RE: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge
Christopher Faylor wrote on Wednesday, December 10, 2008 5:49 PM:: The historical reasons for merging the cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists no longer seems to exist so I am contemplating merging the two lists. If anyone has a compelling reason why this should not happen please send it to one of the two lists. If I don't hear a coherent argument against doing this, I'll throw the switch over the weekend. Btw, I'm only mildly sympathetic to arguments like It will be more email for me. I'm more concerned with having to constantly shuttle people back and forth between the two lists. Unless there is a compelling argument to the contrary, I think that the fact that people are confused about which list to use outweighs the increase in email traffic for people who just want to hear about cygwin/x. cgf Although I currently have rules to put the two lists in different mail folders and it works well for me, but I'd also be perfectly happy with the change. There are plenty of borderline issues where it's not clear (to the user at least) whether the problem is X related or cygwin related, so a unified list removes any need to speculate. With the 1.7 release now officially available for public test, there are bound to be issues in X apps, where the cause is really in the cygwin DLL, so merging the lists asap will save everyone having to play the guess-the-list game. A couple of things to consider (although you're probably way ahead of me): Will mail sent to the xfree ML email address be diverted (or mirrored) to the cygwin ML? Human nature being what it is, it's unrealistic to expect everyone replying to an old thread to remember to change the To: line. Also, what will happen to the archives? Will they be merged too? If they are, any links to xfree archived posts (both within the ML itself, and also from bookmarks/blogs/forums/other MLs/etc) will be broken. Would it be possible to alias the old URLs to avoid breaking links? If the archives are not merged, the threading should at least be maintained (both ways) between the old xfree list and the merged list. (i.e. a reply to a message on cygwin-xfree which goes to the cygwin ML needs the References entry to point back to the xfree archive, and the xfree message needs the Follow-ups entry to point to the cygwin archive). Phil -- This email has been scanned by Ascribe PLC using Microsoft Antigen for Exchange. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge
- Original Message - From: Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@cygwin.com To: cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 10:28 PM Subject: Re: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 02:45:17PM -0500, jose isaias cabrera wrote: I don't mind the traffic of xfree, but the cygwin list has too much traffic. You have my mild sympathy. Well, come to think of it, we could both merge cygwin + cygwin-xfree, BUT also _resplit_ cygwin, but this time into cygwin 1.7 and cygwin-the rest. So the additional X traffic (which will be far less than the 1.7 traffic I guess) is balanced better again. just a thought. -Andreas -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 09:51:11PM +0100, Andreas Eibach wrote: From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-xfree Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 10:28 PM Subject: Re: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge Why are you duplicating the headers of the email in the body of the message? There is no need for this repetition and you're feeding spammers by adding email addresses there. On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 02:45:17PM -0500, jose isaias cabrera wrote: I don't mind the traffic of xfree, but the cygwin list has too much traffic. You have my mild sympathy. Well, come to think of it, we could both merge cygwin + cygwin-xfree, BUT also _resplit_ cygwin, but this time into cygwin 1.7 and cygwin-the rest. So the additional X traffic (which will be far less than the 1.7 traffic I guess) is balanced better again. just a thought. The intent is to make 1.7 the default release of Cygwin. There will be no the rest in a month or two. My sympathies are growing milder by the minute. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge
--- On Fri, 12/12/08, Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@cygwin.com wrote: Snipped My sympathies are growing milder by the minute. I am only a lurker here just trying to keep track of events in cygwin-X, but I do think your arguments for re-merging the lists are not unreasonable. It will mean change for those who have only been tracking cygwin-X, and that's not always comfortable. I frankly can't come up with any solid reason to oppose the re-merge, so I guess that's a yes vote here. Especially if you have already planned on using Mr. Betts' ideas about maintaining X-threads and links to the X-archives. Regards, Peter -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 04:30:37PM -0800, Peter Farley wrote: --- On Fri, 12/12/08, Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@cygwin.com wrote: Snipped My sympathies are growing milder by the minute. I am only a lurker here just trying to keep track of events in cygwin-X, but I do think your arguments for re-merging the lists are not unreasonable. It will mean change for those who have only been tracking cygwin-X, and that's not always comfortable. I frankly can't come up with any solid reason to oppose the re-merge, so I guess that's a yes vote here. Especially if you have already planned on using Mr. Betts' ideas about maintaining X-threads and links to the X-archives. I responded to the message here but my clever mailer (which I programmed myself so I only have myself to blame) only sent it to cygwin-xfree. http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2008-12/msg00295.html Short answer: The only thing I'm considering is turning off the cygwin-xfree list and removing hints of it from cygwin.com/lists.html. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
Re: cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists to merge
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:10:53PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 04:30:37PM -0800, Peter Farley wrote: --- On Fri, 12/12/08, Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@cygwin.com wrote: Snipped My sympathies are growing milder by the minute. I am only a lurker here just trying to keep track of events in cygwin-X, but I do think your arguments for re-merging the lists are not unreasonable. It will mean change for those who have only been tracking cygwin-X, and that's not always comfortable. I frankly can't come up with any solid reason to oppose the re-merge, so I guess that's a yes vote here. Especially if you have already planned on using Mr. Betts' ideas about maintaining X-threads and links to the X-archives. I responded to the message here but my clever mailer (which I programmed myself so I only have myself to blame) only sent it to cygwin-xfree. Wow, that was clear. I can't blame the mailer for a nonsensical sentence. I responded to the message but my mailer only sent it to the cygwin list. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
