From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FvPLp-0004Mp-Sk for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 02:00:22 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k5S1wSX2018756; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 01:58:28 GMT Received: from skinny.southernlinux.net (ns2.rednecks.net [64.192.52.5]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5S1uCem008936 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 01:56:12 GMT Received: (qmail 28748 invoked by uid 210); 27 Jun 2006 21:55:14 -0400 Received: from 64.192.55.166 by skinny (envelope-from , uid 201) with qmail-scanner-1.25st (clamdscan: 0.88.2/1564. f-prot: 4.4.2/3.14.11. spamassassin: 3.1.0. perlscan: 1.25st. Clear:RC:1(64.192.55.166):. Processed in 0.063355 secs); 28 Jun 2006 01:55:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.99.99.11?) (64.192.55.166) by 0 with SMTP; 27 Jun 2006 21:55:13 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-dev-announce list From: Ned Ludd To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <44A06F96.2070503@gentoo.org> References: <449DFDD1.1090506@gentoo.org> <1151206378.29095.32.camel@localhost> <449E214B.6020401@gentoo.org> <1151349060.11622.63.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <44A03F2F.3090408@gentoo.org> <44A06F96.2070503@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 21:56:09 -0400 Message-Id: <1151459769.8059.18.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 017fbad4-e4f4-40c4-bb2c-f5014a8863ac X-Archives-Hash: 42c0302edc5001cb6aff9c07e75b3281 On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 17:36 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote: > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > > Agree, but with the caveat that devs must still be at least subscribed > > to -core even if they choose not to read it. This way, you could have a > > -dev-announce that also refers to something private on -core if need be. > > > >> Now, do we really need it to be -core-announce? Not really. In fact, > >> at one point we'd come up with both a -core-announce and a > >> -dev-announce, with -core-announce being for more sensitive information. > > > > I'm having a tough time thinking of sensitive information that all devs > > must know about (i.e., that would qualify for -core-announce). > > I'd rather not create a -core-announce. The amount of times those types > of things come up on the list are rare. It would be easier to have an > standard subject heading (maybe ANNOUNCEMENT:) that people can use in > their filters. If devs start abusing it, then we'll vote them off the > island :) Simple, Effective.. I like it.. -- Ned Ludd Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list