Close samba-cvs mailing list?

[Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE]

On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 07:00:47PM -0700, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> What I'm trying to understand is why - we discussed this morning about
> how people find it hard to follow that any Samba development occurs, and
> given the now reduced volume on samba-cvs, why shouldn't it be on the
> main list?

Just for the large difference in subscriber numbers. Anyone doing real
development is subscribed to both anyway, and follow-ups are going to
samba-technical. 

> If people can't/wont describe their development in great detail on
> samba-technical@ before they commit, why not at least describe it there
> after it?

I think this would make samba-technical a developer-only list too much. I like
having people discuss real bugs in detail on samba-technical, and I suspect not
all of that audience is interested in the checkins.

It's easy to procmail both into the same folder, so you see exactly the same
effect.

> My hope is that this would make the list more relevant, particularly
> given recent complaints to that effect.

Relevance and sheer volume don't always correlate :-)

Volker
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20040813/db065bc6/attachment.bin