On 13/02/2012 12:13, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > Le 2/13/12 11:53 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò a écrit : >> On 13/02/2012 11:47, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: >>> Le 2/13/12 11:40 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò a écrit : >>> >>> Does it look better? >>> What is important is that discussions about the development happen on >>> the ASF mailing lists. That it is duplicated on any other archives is >>> a no brainer. Sooner or later, people will subscribe on The ASF >>> mailing list, and nabble will just become history. If I can't get all >>> the mails when checking the syncope-dev ML, because some other >>> discussions happened only on nabble, then this is clearly a no go. >> Ok, I understand the principle here: so, both Nabble forums will be >> used as: >> * archive for any mail sent to syncope-dev and syncope-user ASF MLs >> * e-mail form submission to syncope-dev and syncope-user ASF MLs, and >> this will be allowed only for people subscribed to MLs >> >> I guess this should comply with rules: right? > > Hmm, let me rephrase it to be sure we are on the same page : > > - discussion about the Syncope dev *must* happen on [email protected], > and can be archived on nable (no, the opposite is not the right way to > do things)
Ok :-) > - archive is a non issue here : The ASF archives messages, but it's a > side effect on having the dev mailing list hosted at The ASF. Ok :-) > Bottom line, what is really crucial is that "if it's not on the (ASF) > mailing list, it hasn't happened'. That's for dev, not for users... > The dev mailing list is not an archive. I think that the only difference between what you say here and what I say above is that in your case you would apply to dev only while I am proposing to apply to both MLs. -- Francesco Chicchiriccò Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
