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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1I9Owm-0004kr-E0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:28:52 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6DHR4CK006704; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:27:04 GMT Received: from shadow.wildlava.net (shadow.wildlava.net [67.40.138.81]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l6DHOwuM004287 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:24:58 GMT Received: from [67.40.138.82] (crater.wildlava.net [67.40.138.82]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shadow.wildlava.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 332E88F394 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:24:57 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4697B567.608@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:24:55 -0600 From: Joe Peterson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070629) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes References: <46968E00.4070202@gentoo.org> <1184290893.6336.73.camel@ashe.anyarch.net> <20070713084000.2ed60939@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20070713084000.2ed60939@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: eb745c8f-7515-4d77-b94b-594b2a3b9b32 X-Archives-Hash: 92e4cd2bde5091d4f1cd2939597a6bc5 Donnie Berkholz wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:41:33 -0700 > Daniel Ostrow wrote: >> 1). Create 1 (ONE) new list, which, for the purposes of this >> discussion I will call it gentoo-dev-info (the name matters not). The >> requirement for subscription for all devs would shift from gentoo-dev >> to gentoo-dev-info. > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=183875 My vote: 1) Keep gentoo-core as-is 2) Do not block or moderate gentoo-dev and do not create more lists 3) Allow policy for devs to use procmail to filter on subject line I just think that many of the proposals to "solve" this are making things more complicated, messy, inelegant, or are just fostering alienation/censorship. If the problem is sifting through too much noise, just make policy allowing #3 above. For example, devs could filter subjects starting with "Re:" if desired. Or we could choose keywords like "Off-topic:" or "Rant:" that would could be filtered. If a dev using a filter wants to see replies or other filtered mail, he/she can go read the mail list archive. -Joe -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list