[arch-general] Mailing list closed for 24 hours
1007380 at gmail.com
1007380 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 28 23:53:13 EDT 2012
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 02:16:23AM +0800, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2012-09-28 12:01:01 +0200] Nicolas Sebrecht:
> > The 28/09/12, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> > > We have recently seen on this very mailing list that for every person
> > > posting considerate opinions, there are dozens who just pollute threads
> > > with fear, uncertainty, doubt, and just sheer incompetence.
> > I'm very confident that an open dev mailing list with topic-oriented
> > policy would just work. I'm so confident because this is how the Gentoo
> > dev mailing list works and it works well.
> So, essentially, you have no arguments except that "it should just work
> like it does for Gentoo"; yet you've posted in this thread five times
> only to repeat the above. But, of course, if our topic of discussion
> were to be technical, your stubbornness (and the resulting noise) would
> magically go away, right?
I agree with Gaetan. Saying this will 'just work' is like saying that
magic exists. It's not going to 'just work,' as you say. I have followed
arch-dev-public for a few months now, and I appreciate the on topic
discussion that happens there, though sometimes I want to contact the
devs to bring something up or ask a question on it. I'd like to just
throw out a few ideas:
1) Create a screening process for people, applications they need to turn
in, etc. to be able to post on the dev list. Taking into account
that it could take up a lot of valuable dev time sorting through
these to get to the meat and potatoes, there could even be a sub
pannel of 'trusted mailing list users' (possibly made up of the
people accepted onto the mailing list that are not official
devs) that pre-screen to filter out obvious spam/trolls.
2) Allow poeple to email arch-dev-public, but only allow their mail to
go through if it is approved. I would rather see something like
number 1 put into effect, as it would reduce the time devs need
to spend going through mail, but it is still an option in my
3) Keep arch-dev-public the way it is, and let people use other means of
communication (a la IRC) and create a specific dev channel so
that users can contact even just one dev with input, and if that
dev sees fit, he can include it in the next mail to
arch-dev-public (basically just another way of screening things)
I would think that both 1 and 3 could be implemented and both parties
would be appeased.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the arch-general