[Benno Senoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
|
| On Thursday 31 May 2001 23:22, you wrote:
| > IMHO the lists don't need to be broken up. Sometimes this list is dead
| > as a doornail. Like in March for instance. And now Murphys law has it
| > that the speed of delivery of the last two weeks has dropped to
Benno Senoner hat gesagt: // Benno Senoner wrote:
> >From a developer POV, this separation has the advantage that developers
> willing (or haiving the time) to help out newbies [...]
... or willing to see how users cope with their developments.
bye,
--
[cut]
> Everyone will be happy and no one will complain (or at least almost no one)
> that people is posting offtopic stuff.
> Thoughts ?
> Benno.
I very much agree. I also think an extra newbie list would be too much ...
I think newbies could learn a lot by subscribing to the user-list.
The
On Thursday 31 May 2001 23:22, you wrote:
> IMHO the lists don't need to be broken up. Sometimes this list is dead
> as a doornail. Like in March for instance. And now Murphys law has it
> that the speed of delivery of the last two weeks has dropped to nothing
> just as some people start talking a
IMHO the lists don't need to be broken up. Sometimes this list is dead
as a doornail. Like in March for instance. And now Murphys law has it
that the speed of delivery of the last two weeks has dropped to nothing
just as some people start talking about how busy it is around here.
However that coul
Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
>
> >BTW, is there a digest available? This would make life easier for me at
> >least.
>
> Yep, a possibility to get digested postings is very important -- well,
> at least I have subscribed to a few less important (but useful) lists
> because digest is less harmless than
>BTW, is there a digest available? This would make life easier for me at
>least.
Yep, a possibility to get digested postings is very important -- well,
at least I have subscribed to a few less important (but useful) lists
because digest is less harmless than the plain postings.
We could move to
douglas irving repetto wrote:
> okay, i'll just go ahead and set up [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> if it takes off, that's great, if not it only cost me a few minutes of
> my time.
>
> jorn, would you like to be the maintainer of LAU too?
I'm pleased to see the response to this idea. Alas, I didn't consul
douglas irving repetto wrote:
>
> Paul Winkler wrote:
>
> > BTW, if someone (jorn & douglas?) gets this started, can we
> > please have it archived somewhere from day 1? Might as well get
> > it right from the beginning.
>
> okay, i'll just go ahead and set up [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> if it takes of
Paul Winkler wrote:
>
> Frank Barknecht wrote:
> > I think, that a linux audio user list (LAU?) would be the most important
> > next step. Unfortunatly linux-audio-using still means, that one has to be
> > familiar with too much development issues. The reason is obvious: a lot of
> > the interest
Paul Winkler wrote:
> BTW, if someone (jorn & douglas?) gets this started, can we
> please have it archived somewhere from day 1? Might as well get
> it right from the beginning.
okay, i'll just go ahead and set up [EMAIL PROTECTED]
if it takes off, that's great, if not it only cost me a few
Frank Barknecht wrote:
> I think, that a linux audio user list (LAU?) would be the most important
> next step. Unfortunatly linux-audio-using still means, that one has to be
> familiar with too much development issues. The reason is obvious: a lot of
> the interesting audio software still is in he
e at
least.
--Richard
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dave
Phillips
Sent: 25 May 2001 15:47
To: LAD Mail
Subject: [linux-audio-dev] developers and development: some thoughts
[...]
So I'm wondering: Is there any interest in a division into
On 2001-05-25 10:47 -0400, Dave Phillips wrote:
> And as ever, I'm still somewhat dismayed at the number of Linux audio
> coders who are *not* present in LAD traffic. I don't know why this
> should be so
Lack of visibility ? Everybody knows about
linux-*@vger.kernel.org but you have to dig a b
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> douglas, i heard you still have bandwidth to spare on
> roar.music.columbia.edu ?
> let's go for it.
yar, you all decide what's needed and i'll be glad to host it.
douglas
--
douglas irving repetto
http://music.columbia.
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>
> douglas irving repetto wrote:
> >
> > Dave Phillips wrote:
> > >
> > > Greetings:
> >
> > i think that i'm subscribed to some ultra low volume linux audio users
> > list...although i can't remember the name or the address...oh yeah,
> > it's:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED
>
> LAD/devel -- developers of Linux audio software
> LAD/users -- users of Linux audio software
> LAD/announce -- moderated? co-working with your webpages?
First of all, I just wanted to say that this seems sensible to
me, too.
> >I've received some messages
> >from disgruntled developers w
douglas irving repetto wrote:
>
> Dave Phillips wrote:
> >
> > Greetings:
>
> i think that i'm subscribed to some ultra low volume linux audio users
> list...although i can't remember the name or the address...oh yeah,
> it's:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ahem. might the fact that vger.rutgers.edu ha
Juhana Sadeharju hat gesagt: // Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
> >From:Dave Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >see it continue so. However, I'm wondering if perhaps it isn't time to
> >split LAD into something like the comp.os.linux.development newsgroup,
> >where there is a further division in
Dave Phillips wrote:
>
> Greetings:
>
> So I'm wondering: Is there any interest in a division into LAD/systen
> and LAD/apps ?
good idea.
how about linux-audio-user ?
as to topics, i'd propose everything about linux audio *except*
"getting-my-soundcard-to-work" type questions. let's by all
Dave Phillips wrote:
>
> Greetings:
i think that i'm subscribed to some ultra low volume linux audio users
list...although i can't remember the name or the address...oh yeah,
it's:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
so there may already be a list for more user-oriented stuff...
anyway, if we do want to brea
> > LAD/devel -- developers of Linux audio software
> > LAD/users -- users of Linux audio software
> > LAD/announce -- moderated? co-working with your webpages?
>
Sounds good to me as well. Seems like the way things are currently might
scare users who want to be part of Linux audio developeme
I agree completely! This is a great and informative list, but we could
_definitely_ also stand to have a more user-focused listserv.
-dgm
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Dave Phillips wrote:
> Greetings:
>
> When LAD was first founded the name choice (Linux Audio Development)
> was deliberate in order
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 08:07:55PM +0300, Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
> >From:Dave Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >see it continue so. However, I'm wondering if perhaps it isn't time to
> >split LAD into something like the comp.os.linux.development newsgroup,
> >where there is a further di
Dave Phillips wrote:
>Greetings: [cut]
>
I'm not against.
By whatever means, people should feel free to ask when they have a
problem or a thought.
I don't think they get ignored in here ?
But if you think a seperate list is better, then do so.
But then we will have to subscribe to two lists (bu
>From: Dave Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>see it continue so. However, I'm wondering if perhaps it isn't time to
>split LAD into something like the comp.os.linux.development newsgroup,
>where there is a further division into c.o.l.d.system and c.o.l.d.apps.
I don't see a need for exactly the a
Greetings:
When LAD was first founded the name choice (Linux Audio Development)
was deliberate in order to hopefully accomodate users and developers in
an open forum. Very obviously the group now tends heavily towards
developers and their concerns, and many members of the list know it as
the Li
27 matches
Mail list logo
