Le 5 sept. 04, à 02:05, Dan Shafer a écrit :
-- snip --
I'm not opposed to *some* fragmentation along fairly broad lines. But
I think creating special lists to discuss SQL or text processing or
animation would be a mistake.
Probably are they some ones of us yet using SQL tools because they
On Sep 4, 2004, at 10:53 PM, Judy Perry wrote:
Right, but I suspect that the issue is less one of needing
area-specific
specificity (ala SQL, TCP, animation etc.) and more one of developers
not
wanting to be bothered with the posts of nonprogrammers.
That sounds a bit harsher than the
It will come as no surprise to those who know me that I find myself not
quite 100% in favor of the new move to splinter our community into
multiple special-interest lists. I've seen this happen before and
although it dramatically increases efficiency, it dramatically
decreases community
Dan Shafer wrote:
It will come as no surprise to those who know me that I find myself not
quite 100% in favor of the new move to splinter our community into
multiple special-interest lists. I've seen this happen before and
although it dramatically increases efficiency, it dramatically decreases
Richard...
Yeah, I'd expect a general-interest list not to be very popular.
If you'll forgive my extending your restaurant analogy, creating
separate special-interest lists is like having a restaurant where only
a single dish is available in all rooms but the main one. The
conviviality that is
Dan Shafer wrote:
Yeah, I'd expect a general-interest list not to be very popular.
And yet here we are.
:)
I'm just suggesting we be very conservative and careful about
how many of these other lists we create and support.
Agreed. It seems the natural evolution of multiple lists this far has
On Sep 4, 2004, at 10:53 PM, Judy Perry wrote:
Right, but I suspect that the issue is less one of needing
area-specific
specificity (ala SQL, TCP, animation etc.) and more one of developers
not
wanting to be bothered with the posts of nonprogrammers.
That sounds a bit harsher than the intention.
