My impression is the following, if it matters: 1. dev@ is like a users@ list, since all users should be devs
2. hackers@ is like a submit@ or patches@ list Does that sound right, or is the analogy muddying things up even more? Ben Original Message From: Christoph Lohmann Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 10:37 AM To: dev mail list Reply To: dev mail list Subject: Re: [dev] I don't get mailinglists. Greetings. On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 19:27:27 +0200 Ross Mohn <rpm...@waxandwane.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 06:45:05PM +0200, Markus Teich wrote: > > Ross Mohn wrote: > > > Yes, I'd like to send these just to hackers@, where they belong > > > > Heyho Ross, > > > > I don't think hackers@ was the right choice. It was a support question, > > neither > > a patch nor a discussion about a proposed patch or even an actual bug > > report of > > a bug in dvtm. Your problem (getting cwd of an arbitrary process) has also > > been > > discussed on dev@ in the past. > > That highlights my frustration with the new definitions for the mailing > lists. I am a hacker/developer and really only ask a question when I > need a little help hacking on the code. As you can see, my question led > me to submit the patched solution in the same email thread. The changed > definitions "keep the development out of the endless support threads on > dev@ and development more enjoyable." My question was a development > question, not a support question, and therefore was more appropriately > discussed on hackers@. Why "support" is discussed on "dev[elopment]" and > not on a new support@ list is still beyond me, but I'll get over it as > soon as Marc shows up on hackers@. :-) If in doubt send to dev@. For hackers@ it's more like: 1.) I have a patch, please apply it. 2.) Discussion happens. 1.) Maintainer applies some patch. 2.) Commit is discussed. For dev@ it's rather theoretical: 1.) Have you considered this old writing in some C bible? How do you think about it? 2.) Long flameware starts and leads to subthreads. 1.) You have to implement this feature! 2.) Fuck off. 3.) You are so unfriendly. I wanted more mailinglists, but Anselm didn’t like more. There is no support at suckless, so there's no need for support@. Sincerely, Christoph Lohmann
