Proposal that we now create two branches - 2_5 and head

[Donovan Baarda]

On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 14:16, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2003, Donovan Baarda <abo at minkirri.apana.org.au> wrote:
[...]
> > Actually, a bigger "attitude" issue for me is having a separate
> > rsync-devel and rsync-user lists. I have almost unsubscribed many times
> > because of the numerous newbie user questions;
> 
> Me too.
> 
> Samba does this with samba-technical and samba.  I think at this point
> the user list for samba only has slightly more traffic than rsync.  I
> think apache may now be the same too.
> 
> Plenty of people post user questions to samba-technical despite
> prominent notices that it is only for developers.  They tend to both
> piss off developers and go unanswered at least some of the time.  It's
> probably due both to "my question *is* technical" and "if the
> developers read it they might answer."  I'm not sure what a good
> solution would be: probably a clearer name would help.  Perhaps
> rsync-dev?  
> 
> What do people feel about this?

The general advice I found ages ago about setting up projects on SF
suggested three lists; <project>-announce, <project>-devel, and
<project>-users.

<project>-announce is for announcing new releases and security alerts.
It is a moderated list, or only allows posting by special individuals.

<project>-devel is for developer discussions, subscriber posts only.

<project>-users is for user discussions, non-subscriber postings allowed
(spam issues allowing).


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ABO: finger abo at minkirri.apana.org.au for more info, including pgp key
----------------------------------------------------------------------