Martijn van Beurden <mva...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The flac and flac-dev mailing lists are mentioned as one here, but I
> think the flac mailing list is far less valuable than the flac-dev
> list. flac (the users mailing list) had 2 discussions in the last 3
> years. I'd say that list can go anyway. The fate of flac-dev is
> something that I think can be discussed.
<snip>
> If anyone has other suggestions, let me know.
(I haven't touched the FLAC source in probably 20 years, but
have done some slightly more recent work around the venerable
sox CLI audio tool (which uses libFLAC) still use sox nearly
every day).
IME, rejecting HTML mail gets rid of the majority of spam and
makes dealing with mailing lists or publicly viewable mailboxes
much easier to maintain.
sox-ng (fork of sox) uses Groups.io, but I don't have much
experience aside from being a subscriber.
sr.ht has some good buzz and momentum around it and (AFAIK) can
be self-hosted. I like it (and kernel.org) since it doesn't
require subscriptions to post and lowers friction around
contributing (so the culture is reply-to-all)
inbox.sourceware.org (mainly GNU toolchain) and lore.kernel.org
(part of Linux Foundation) uses the same poorly-marketed(*)
AGPL Perl code around git for mail archival (available over HTTP,
NNTP, IMAP, and POP3).
I think kernel.org has moved or will move to the "archives
first" model which forces messages into archives before relaying
to SMTP subscribers (via mlmmj).
AFAIK, most kernel.org lists and all of sr.ht rejects HTML,
not sure about sourceware.
Thanks for reading.
(*) Disclaimer: I'm a shy introvert and main author of said
poorly-marketed AGPL Perl code :P I refuse to have any online
presence associated with bandwidth-wasting logos, JavaScript
complexity or anything commercial at all.
_______________________________________________
flac-dev mailing list -- flac-dev@xiph.org
To unsubscribe send an email to flac-dev-le...@xiph.org
