On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 04:06:21PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040328 15:55]: > > For a while I wondered if we need a moderated list for infrastructure > > issue. [...] > > > > Where should we send mails such as > > [...] > > I for myself would be quite happy with most of them at d-d-a (at least > all permanent messages as "services moved", "host (un)restricted", > ...), because they have more or less the same audience as d-d-a. > "Temporary" messages are IMHO quite good announced in d-d, together > with an appropriate irc-topic. (And whoever ignores the few messages > of a debian-admin-member to d-d probably is also not hit by temporary > outages.)
I dunno. We *want* -devel-announce to be read be every DD, even the ones which are almost-MIA, in the hope that they'd react to urgent stuff. If there'll be a lot more of infrastructural messages (which I fully approve of per se) on -devel-announce, some of them might feel annoyed by them (if they're almost-MIA, they're probably not interested whether the BTS moves from master to spohr or whatever) and unsubscribe from -devel-announce. Thus I'd rather see an -infrastructure list (but that is partly due to the fact that I'm not subscribed to -devel right now). More general infrastructural messages with permanent or critical impact should still be CC'd to -devel-announce, regardless of -infrastructure, IMHO. Michael -- Michael Banck Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.advogato.org/person/mbanck/diary.html
