This proposal troubles me. The dev list is supposed to be the single place you can monitor as a contributor, and be assured that all development activity is happening there. We should absolutely be minimising the other places people need to check.
And also, I do not want to have to rely on other people to be doing my filtering for me. I don't want to have to trust that if a dev-storage discussion becomes relevant for the general dev list, that it will be moved there. Obviously, the idea of general@ has precedent, but at least the concept seems distinct enough. It's going to be very infrequent that a PMC-level discussion ends up in a patch review, or vice versa. If we start splitting out the dev@ list into subjects, we risk fracturing the community. That's not to say it hasn't been done before. Hadoop do it. But perhaps there is some reason it works for them. TL;DR: We need to consider the community impact carefully. :) On 25 March 2013 23:14, Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com> wrote: > Then agree to discuss it on dev list. Doesn't seem very hard to do to me. > There's going to be people like you and me who'll be monitoring and > reminding people that the feature is cross components. > > --Alex > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:j...@zonker.net] > > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 3:54 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] create a general@ mailing list? > > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013, at 05:45 PM, Alex Huang wrote: > > > To me the dev list is already a general list. I rather see more topic > > > oriented lists like: dev-network, dev-storage, dev-hypervisor. > > > > What happens if a topic crosses over between storage, networking and > > hypervisors (or some subset)? I think it would be *very* hard to make > that > > workable. > > > > Best, > > > > jzb > > -- > > Joe Brockmeier > > j...@zonker.net > > Twitter: @jzb > > http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ > -- NS
