[Mono-list] Re: mono-hackers --> mono-devel-list

Adam Treat manyoso@yahoo.com
Sat, 1 Feb 2003 14:49:26 -0500

On Saturday 01 February 2003 07:37 pm, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> Hello,
>     I understand that it is easier for *you* to do things your way.  The
> way I want the mailing list setup is the same used in Gnome, and that is
> what *I* personally want the setup to be.   We can argue about which one
> is best, but so far I fail to see the point.  I have told you how you
> can fix and improve things.  Its your turn.

Right, and you have not told me *why* you want to require me to write a GNU 
Mailman patch so that mono development can be discussed in the open.  Your 
way is no easier to maintain then just *simply* creating a new mono mailing 
list like you have done for all the others.  In fact it is *harder* to 
maintain because it requires a hack around GNU Mailman.

> > No, I don't think I am confused.  In your scenario I would be the only
> > real subscriber to mono-devel and everyone else would be subscribed to
> No.  Many other people would be subscribed to mono-devel-list, those
> sharing your same interests for example.

You mean mono developers who are not on mono-hackers?  I don't know of any, 
but that is really beside the point.

> > 2.  Write a script that will take all the subscribers of mono-hackers and
> > subscribe them to mono-devel.  This is not a good solution because you
> > shouldn't be subscribing people without permission and because it
> > requires someone (you have volunteered me and I do not accept) to write
> > the script. Better to just let everyone manage his/her own subscription
> > like every other mailing list.
> That can be argued, and I have no strong opinion yet on that.  But I
> feel that anyone in mono-hackers should have post rights to
> mono-devel-list, so the patch is still required.

Ok, so everyone in mono-hackers that wishes to discuss the technical 
development of mono can subscribe.  They will have automatic post rights.  No 
patch required.

> I have requested the sysadmins to create the list, but it wont be
> enabled until you send me the above described patch.

I don't see why this should be about 'Adam wanting to make this happen' 
because this concerns the entire Mono community.  Right now, mono technical 
discussion is going on behind a closed list that is not open to all mono 
developers.  This is a matter of openness.