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