Oh, a couple more questions. On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 13:24:32 -0700, "Mike Doty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > All- > > We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where > only > devs can post
What about arch testers? > but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. This is bad, for two reasons. 1. It doesn't put responsibility for moderating messages in a timely fashion on anyone. Devs will want to hack, not moderate, and I worry that messages would get ignored. 2. It doesn't set a clear standard for what is acceptable or not. Some devs might moderate in questions/suggestions from non-devs willingly, while others might decide that they're getting in the way and moderate them out. > devs who moderate in bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. What about devs who moderate *out good* posts? Do you have a way to make sure devs aren't trashing messages that others might find useful? I could see situations where a user or dev-to-be makes a suggestion or comment that is badly written, or not feasible in the dev's mind, or "wrong" to them in some other way, and the dev trashes it, figuring it's irrelevant to everyone. > gentoo-project list will be created to take over what -dev frequently > becomes. Is there an official definition of the split between the two? Is -dev basically going to be core Gentoo devs collaborating on internal things that require coordination, and -project going to be where various projects get implemented? > This will probably remove the need for -core(everything gets leaked out > anyway) but that's a path to cross later. I'd cross it sooner, rather than later, because without moving -core's traffic to -dev, it will look like you're just excluding non-devs for no reason. If -dev becomes a place where devs truly need an uninterrupted place to discuss things, then you could fairly say that the devs need the moderation to work efficiently. Thanks again, Thomas Tuttle -- Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
