On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 18:20 -0700, Archaic wrote: > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 12:11:06PM +1100, Ryan Oliver wrote: > > > > +1, it should never have been removed. > > I just don't understand why development shouldn't happen on a > development list? Why shouldn't technical threads be here? This is what > lfs-dev has always been about. lfs-hackers, IMO, was ill-conceived in > the first place as a list where non-mainline development of 2.6/nptl > took place. The reasoning I recall is that it cluttered lfs-dev. lfs-dev > is about development.
lfs-dev = book development lfs-hackers = bleeding edge/hint/Proof of concept development lfs-hackers was created to provide a place so proof of concept development did not happen off list, as was occuring beforehand. > People reading this list are expected to be > interested in development otherwise there is no reason to read it. For base development of the book I agree. For banging on bleeding edge / proof of concept stuff which is either not ready for prime time, or not wholly suitable to current LFS book development, I disagree. > If a > person has no interest in a particular thread, delete it without reading > it. This list is much quieter than say, lkml or postfix or numerous > lists and sorting through it is not hard to do even for busy people. Depends on just how busy you are. Regards [R] -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
