Le lun. 9 déc. 2024 à 16:36, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 at 15:19, Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > Following up here on the question on GH:
> >
> > > why is this disussion again NOT happening on any ASF list but here where
> > > it does not get reflected to any ASF list afaict?
> >
> > As Sebb wrote (below), the discussion is sent to "issues@". Subscribed
> > people can see what is discussed on GH but their eventual reply won't
> > be sent there, only to "issues@" (which doesn't do any good).
> > [That's why I started a thread on "dev@".]
>
> Note that JIRA updates are also sent to issues@.
> These can also contain some discussion, so developers should follow
> issues@ as well.
Sure; but I think that the point is that some discussions should be
"manually" moved to here ("dev@") for non-trivial decision to be
validly made, because agreement or notice (either on JIRA or GH)
is not sufficient to assume that everyone would have agreed...
[Maybe this missing step is what caused the recent "surprise" on
added dependencies (?).]
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
