On Thursday 07 April 2005 15:15, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Non-developers subscribe to d-d-a to hear & follow DD stuff. I don't
> see there as being any reason for them to piss & moan about there being
> DD stuff on d-d-a, that's just plain silly.
As one of the non-maintaining subscribers to d-d-a,
* Andrew Pollock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:43:13PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > No, that's d-d-a, just get around the name issue (ie: ignore it/get over
> > it/whatever) and use it, just don't abuse it.
> >
>
> But there's arguably a lot of non-developers subscrib
[Daniel Ruoso]
> > The issue with -devel being too high traffic and off-topic is of course
> > still there;
>
> That's something important.
Use of a "Subject: CFD: " convention would mitigate this. Particularly
if the convention were widespread enough to be a (de facto) standard,
and thus to ma
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:43:13PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Daniel Ruoso ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On the other side, d-d-a is a list which has a very low traffic, and
> > certainly almost every developer see the posts in d-d-a, but... not
> > every email that intends to reach all devel
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 03:37:12PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> I have the impression that some geek mass media also monitor d-d-a as an
> unofficial source of (taken as) Debian press releases, so I'd be a bit
> cautious with that, not only DDs are reading d-d-a.
So what you're saying is that d-
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 02:52:46PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > The issue with -devel being too high traffic and off-topic is of course
> > still there;
> That's something important.
So take back the list by posting more on-topic stuff there? The best way to
combat off-topicness is by encourag
Em Ter, 2005-04-05 às 10:37, Michael Banck escreveu:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 04:59:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On the contrary, I think a mail intended to reach all developers is
> > the *definition* of an announcement (wrt d-d-a).
> Also, there's a difference between 'Every DD should/m
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 04:59:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On the contrary, I think a mail intended to reach all developers is
> the *definition* of an announcement (wrt d-d-a).
I have the impression that some geek mass media also monitor d-d-a as an
unofficial source of (taken as) Debian p
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:38:30PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> I was recently thinking about the misuse of debian-private mailing list,
> and I saw that most of the bad-uses of -private were made with the
> intention of reaching all developers.
> Is this wrong? Yes, and no. The question is that d
Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
Hi,
> Isn't a public mailing list (with public logs), but moderated to
> @debian.org posters, a possible solution to the current misuse of
> debian-private?
Why the hell spending one's precious time with such metaphysical
questions?
In any case, co
> I was recently thinking about the misuse of debian-private mailing list,
> and I saw that most of the bad-uses of -private were made with the
> intention of reaching all developers.
>
> Is this wrong? Yes, and no. The question is that debian-devel has too
> much traffic and it's difficult to fol
* Daniel Ruoso ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On the other side, d-d-a is a list which has a very low traffic, and
> certainly almost every developer see the posts in d-d-a, but... not
> every email that intends to reach all developers is appropriate to d-d-a
> since it's not allways an announce.
>
Hi,
I was recently thinking about the misuse of debian-private mailing list,
and I saw that most of the bad-uses of -private were made with the
intention of reaching all developers.
Is this wrong? Yes, and no. The question is that debian-devel has too
much traffic and it's difficult to follow all
13 matches
Mail list logo
