Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
The mailing lists novel... KISShttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle us...@octave.org d...@octave.org That's enough. 2012/11/25 Juan Pablo Carbajal ajuanpi+...@gmail.com On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Carnë Draug carandraug+...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 November 2012 01:01, Daniel J Sebald daniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: On 11/25/2012 04:10 PM, Carnė Draug wrote: On 25 November 2012 21:44, Daniel J Sebalddaniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: At the moment, the decision whether a thread belongs to the help or octave-dev mailing list is whether the reply is use package X from octave forge. I'll argue that most Octave users already use at least one of the Octave Forge packages. And I'll also argue that no one in Octave Forge uses all the Octave Forge packages. So if the question is how to use a function from an Octave Forge package, users on the help mailing list already are the right people to answer it. Keeping them separated makes no sense anymore. So there will be changes to the Octave webpage descriptions that consequently (or at least intend to) direct the bulk of OctDev to the h...@octave.org mailing list? Yes. That's why this is being discussed in the maintainers mailing list. There's plenty of applications and packages for Octave that are not part of Forge. That doesn't mean Octave Forge isn't primarily about packages and applications. What is this applications you keep talking about? There's only packages. You are thinking of applications as in hunk of software, I suspect. I'm speaking in terms of applied science, e.g., signal processing, civil engineering, image processing, statistics. Damn you homophones. Causing trouble since monkeys learned to talk. Yes and no. I often see discussions of bugs. Some bugs are straightforward and remain on the tracker. Some are either vague and difficult to solve and warrant help from others, hence discussion list. Some bugs expose an underlying weakness in design and warrant discussion about design modifications. That may be true in core. I do not remember that ever happening in forge. Considering the way development is done in Forge, I wouldn't consider this to ever be a problem. install package would be the conceptual development there--now stable. install package would already belong to the maintainers mailing list since it's handled by pkg, itself part of core. It is, however, a very good example of a maintainers discussion that developers of forge should be involved. Yes it is. Not one big change though, but slowly slowly seems to be the direction it's taking. It doesn't make sense to make that question yet, maybe it never will. But in the mean time, when things start to overlap, such as in the case of the mailing lists, it makes sense to merge them. We are not discussing more than just that, mailing lists. Getting rid of an active mailing list is more than a name change. That traffic has to go somewhere. I doubt the package concept is going away. We are merging 3 mailing lists, whose subjects have been overlapping too much and too often, into 2. I do agree with Carnë idea. In particular with the refinement proposed by jwe were everything gets merged to the current mailing lists. I do not really understand, the complication observed or proposed by Daniel (no ofense!). I think the issue is quite simple, so a simple solution should be enough. Cheers -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On 23 November 2012 19:17, Carnë Draug carandraug+...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone I'm proposing moving the current Octave Forge mailing list (octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net) to the same server as as the ones from Octave core. My suggestion is to have the following octave related mailing lists: * maintain...@octave.org - same as now, discussion of development of Octave core * fo...@octave.org - new mailing list for discussion of development of Octave Forge * h...@octave.org - mailing list for discussion of any help related to Octave (packages included) I spoke with JWE about this and he suggested to keep only the maintainers and help mailing lists, moving the development discussions of Octave Forge to the Octave core maintainers mailing list. That should avoid any confusion new users may have. I do not oppose to it, after all there's not that many Octave Forge only development threads. Carnë -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On 11/25/2012 11:47 AM, Carnë Draug wrote: On 23 November 2012 19:17, Carnë Draugcarandraug+...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone I'm proposing moving the current Octave Forge mailing list (octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net) to the same server as as the ones from Octave core. My suggestion is to have the following octave related mailing lists: * maintain...@octave.org - same as now, discussion of development of Octave core * fo...@octave.org - new mailing list for discussion of development of Octave Forge * h...@octave.org - mailing list for discussion of any help related to Octave (packages included) I spoke with JWE about this and he suggested to keep only the maintainers and help mailing lists, moving the development discussions of Octave Forge to the Octave core maintainers mailing list. That should avoid any confusion new users may have. I do not oppose to it, after all there's not that many Octave Forge only development threads. Traffic fluctuates. Sometimes one is more active than the other. Before combining these two, how about considering some alternate names? I get both mailing lists at the moment. I do like the separation for the reason you explained very well a month or two ago, i.e., folks tend to gravitate toward one list because it is too much to pay attention to everything. To me, forge is simply too generic. That the term forge may be common for other projects doesn't change that fact. We feel these two are good: maintain...@octave.org h...@octave.org As the third category, how about: packa...@octave.org applicati...@octave.org advan...@octave.org Any confusion could be cleared up as part of the Octave.org web page. Although the web page does explain matters well in terms of expected help, it doesn't present mailing list info in a succinct and clear way. If instead the Mailing Lists info were organized either graphically or in table format: h...@octave.org applicati...@octave.org maintain...@octave.org blurbblurb blurb where the blurbs might be something like help: For introductory and operational details slightly beyond program syntax. applications: For advanced features such as packages and interface to other software. maintainers: For programming specifics related to the core C++ code. Now, if we want to combine bug reports for applications and maintainers in the same tracker, that's fine, but have a drop-down category that makes the distinction. Also, for the HTML shortcut for h...@octave.org we could replace launching an email to a link of the explanation about expected help, i.e., a short little detour to help weed out beginners asking rudimentary syntax questions. Put the email launch shortcut there. Dan -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On 25 November 2012 19:58, Daniel J Sebald daniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: On 11/25/2012 11:47 AM, Carnė Draug wrote: On 23 November 2012 19:17, Carnė Draugcarandraug+...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone I'm proposing moving the current Octave Forge mailing list (octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net) to the same server as as the ones from Octave core. My suggestion is to have the following octave related mailing lists: * maintain...@octave.org - same as now, discussion of development of Octave core * fo...@octave.org - new mailing list for discussion of development of Octave Forge * h...@octave.org - mailing list for discussion of any help related to Octave (packages included) I spoke with JWE about this and he suggested to keep only the maintainers and help mailing lists, moving the development discussions of Octave Forge to the Octave core maintainers mailing list. That should avoid any confusion new users may have. I do not oppose to it, after all there's not that many Octave Forge only development threads. Traffic fluctuates. Sometimes one is more active than the other. Before combining these two, how about considering some alternate names? I get both mailing lists at the moment. I do like the separation for the reason you explained very well a month or two ago, i.e., folks tend to gravitate toward one list because it is too much to pay attention to everything. To me, forge is simply too generic. That the term forge may be common for other projects doesn't change that fact. We feel these two are good: Forge is not too generic since the project name is Octave Forge. Therefore, no doubt should come out of an address such as fo...@octave.org. As the third category, how about: packa...@octave.org applicati...@octave.org advan...@octave.org [snip] applications: For advanced features such as packages and interface to other software. You seem to be confused about what Octave Forge is. We are not the go to place for all applications, packages and advanced Octave stuff. There's plenty of applications and packages for Octave that are not part of Forge. Calling it advanced is insulting to core as if one could not do advanced stuff with core only. Now, if we want to combine bug reports for applications and maintainers in the same tracker, Tracker? We are only talking about mailing list. Bug reports are to be discussed on the bug trackers so they should never appear on the mailing list. I'll make sure to direct any discussion of Octave Forge bugs to the Octave Forge bug tracker. That said, the only type of threads from the current Octave Forge mailing list that would now appear in maintainers would be license stuff, adding of new packages, google summer of code, etc... As an example, for the month of November, these are the threads: - these ones were in both maintainers and forge mailing list and don't really count (this seems to becoming more common over time) : * this very own thread * http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Octconf-2013-td4646964.html - discussion of OctConf2013 * http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/low-level-I-O-GPIB-USBTMC-VXI11-td4646993.html - about various instrument control packages that are not part of OctaveForge and whether they could be merged (descended into discussion of legal stuff and was eventually moved to the maintainers mailing list) * http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/complex-error-function-td4645714.html - someone shared code for Octave and it was discussed where it should go - http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/removing-java-package-from-SVN-tree-td4647021.html - this ones was about the removal of the java package from Octave Forge since it was moved to Octave core. It was not mentioned in the maintainers mailing list but I wouldn't not have been out of place together with an announcement of its move - the following 4 e-mails were all on the same subject. We decide to restrict the licenses in forge and sent a couple of e-mails to the copyright owners asking to relicense their code * http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/removal-of-non-standard-licenses-in-Octave-Forge-td4645841.html * http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Re-License-Andy-Adler-s-code-in-Octave-Forge-td4646143.html * http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/License-of-medfilt1-in-Octave-Forge-td4646144.html * http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/FreeBSD-vs-simplified-BSD-td4645843.html Carnë -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On 11/25/2012 01:48 PM, Carnë Draug wrote: On 25 November 2012 19:58, Daniel J Sebalddaniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: On 11/25/2012 11:47 AM, Carnė Draug wrote: On 23 November 2012 19:17, Carnė Draugcarandraug+...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone I'm proposing moving the current Octave Forge mailing list (octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net) to the same server as as the ones from Octave core. My suggestion is to have the following octave related mailing lists: * maintain...@octave.org - same as now, discussion of development of Octave core * fo...@octave.org - new mailing list for discussion of development of Octave Forge * h...@octave.org - mailing list for discussion of any help related to Octave (packages included) I spoke with JWE about this and he suggested to keep only the maintainers and help mailing lists, moving the development discussions of Octave Forge to the Octave core maintainers mailing list. That should avoid any confusion new users may have. I do not oppose to it, after all there's not that many Octave Forge only development threads. Traffic fluctuates. Sometimes one is more active than the other. Before combining these two, how about considering some alternate names? I get both mailing lists at the moment. I do like the separation for the reason you explained very well a month or two ago, i.e., folks tend to gravitate toward one list because it is too much to pay attention to everything. To me, forge is simply too generic. That the term forge may be common for other projects doesn't change that fact. We feel these two are good: Forge is not too generic since the project name is Octave Forge. Therefore, no doubt should come out of an address such as fo...@octave.org. As the third category, how about: packa...@octave.org applicati...@octave.org advan...@octave.org [snip] applications: For advanced features such as packages and interface to other software. You seem to be confused about what Octave Forge is. Yes, that is my point. Developers talk of Octave Forge as though it is something other than packages, something more encompassing, etc. I look at the website http://octave.sourceforge.net/ and I see at the very top, first thing: Octave-Forge - Extra packages for GNU Octave Am I mistaken for assuming then that Octave Forge is primarily packages? What is this forge concept that I'm not understanding? I get a lot of email with OctDev tagged onto it (the name OctDev itself leads to confusion given it is associated with Octave Forge...and I understand this is why we are discussing name changes) and discussions seem to be primarily about packages and Java and applications. That seems like advanced stuff. We are not the go to place for all applications, packages and advanced Octave stuff. OK, that's not what it is. What is it? There's plenty of applications and packages for Octave that are not part of Forge. That doesn't mean Octave Forge isn't primarily about packages and applications. What is Forge? Calling it advanced is insulting to core as if one could not do advanced stuff with core only. No it isn't. Packages encompass advanced fields of study. Calling something advanced doesn't imply something else isn't advanced in its own way. Now, if we want to combine bug reports for applications and maintainers in the same tracker, Tracker? We are only talking about mailing list. Bug reports are to be discussed on the bug trackers so they should never appear on the mailing list. I'll make sure to direct any discussion of Octave Forge bugs to the Octave Forge bug tracker. Yes and no. I often see discussions of bugs. Some bugs are straightforward and remain on the tracker. Some are either vague and difficult to solve and warrant help from others, hence discussion list. Some bugs expose an underlying weakness in design and warrant discussion about design modifications. That said, the only type of threads from the current Octave Forge mailing list that would now appear in maintainers would be license stuff, adding of new packages, google summer of code, etc... As an example, for the month of November, these are the threads: Yes, those all make sense. There is some overlap, which is fine. Occassional duplication hasn't struck me as a concern as of yet. Perhaps others feel otherwise. I guess the question is whether Octave Forge should be rolled into an all inclusive Octave. Presumably that's the way it will be someday, provided things stabilize. Is that day approaching? Sort of, but not quite yet, I would argue. 2012 has certainly been one of the most active years of development, and I think the reorganization of the core code has gone a long way toward a more developer-friendly project. However, the GUI will be a wave of issues in a multi-platform supported project. If Forge-related posts get mixed with core-related posts with an increase due to GUI issues, could it
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On 11/25/2012 04:10 PM, Carnë Draug wrote: On 25 November 2012 21:44, Daniel J Sebalddaniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: On 11/25/2012 01:48 PM, Carnë Draug wrote: You seem to be confused about what Octave Forge is. [snip] I get a lot of email with OctDev tagged onto it (the name OctDev itself leads to confusion given it is associated with Octave Forge...and I understand this is why we are discussing name changes) and discussions seem to be primarily about packages and Java and applications. That seems like advanced stuff. At the moment, the decision whether a thread belongs to the help or octave-dev mailing list is whether the reply is use package X from octave forge. I'll argue that most Octave users already use at least one of the Octave Forge packages. And I'll also argue that no one in Octave Forge uses all the Octave Forge packages. So if the question is how to use a function from an Octave Forge package, users on the help mailing list already are the right people to answer it. Keeping them separated makes no sense anymore. So there will be changes to the Octave webpage descriptions that consequently (or at least intend to) direct the bulk of OctDev to the h...@octave.org mailing list? Thoughts from others who have followed the help email list? There's plenty of applications and packages for Octave that are not part of Forge. That doesn't mean Octave Forge isn't primarily about packages and applications. What is this applications you keep talking about? There's only packages. You are thinking of applications as in hunk of software, I suspect. I'm speaking in terms of applied science, e.g., signal processing, civil engineering, image processing, statistics. However, looking at the list of packages just now, it does seem there are quite a few more geared toward software, e.g., tcl-octave. Anyway, packa...@octave.org was an alternative I tossed out there. What is Forge? Forget that the word Forge means anything. It's just the name of the project. Maybe historically means it was hosted in SourceForge. Or maybe because the original idea behind the project was to develop and test new things which would be moved into core as they mature. Both. Yes and no. I often see discussions of bugs. Some bugs are straightforward and remain on the tracker. Some are either vague and difficult to solve and warrant help from others, hence discussion list. Some bugs expose an underlying weakness in design and warrant discussion about design modifications. That may be true in core. I do not remember that ever happening in forge. Considering the way development is done in Forge, I wouldn't consider this to ever be a problem. install package would be the conceptual development there--now stable. That said, the only type of threads from the current Octave Forge mailing list that would now appear in maintainers would be license stuff, adding of new packages, google summer of code, etc... As an example, for the month of November, these are the threads: Yes, those all make sense. There is some overlap, which is fine. Occasional duplication hasn't struck me as a concern as of yet. Perhaps others feel otherwise. It's not just occasional. Almost all of the forge threads related to development are also mentioned in the maintainers mailing list. I guess the question is whether Octave Forge should be rolled into an all inclusive Octave. Presumably that's the way it will be someday, provided things stabilize. Is that day approaching? Sort of, but not quite yet, I would argue. Yes it is. Not one big change though, but slowly slowly seems to be the direction it's taking. It doesn't make sense to make that question yet, maybe it never will. But in the mean time, when things start to overlap, such as in the case of the mailing lists, it makes sense to merge them. We are not discussing more than just that, mailing lists. Getting rid of an active mailing list is more than a name change. That traffic has to go somewhere. I doubt the package concept is going away. Dan -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On 26 November 2012 01:01, Daniel J Sebald daniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: On 11/25/2012 04:10 PM, Carnė Draug wrote: On 25 November 2012 21:44, Daniel J Sebalddaniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: At the moment, the decision whether a thread belongs to the help or octave-dev mailing list is whether the reply is use package X from octave forge. I'll argue that most Octave users already use at least one of the Octave Forge packages. And I'll also argue that no one in Octave Forge uses all the Octave Forge packages. So if the question is how to use a function from an Octave Forge package, users on the help mailing list already are the right people to answer it. Keeping them separated makes no sense anymore. So there will be changes to the Octave webpage descriptions that consequently (or at least intend to) direct the bulk of OctDev to the h...@octave.org mailing list? Yes. That's why this is being discussed in the maintainers mailing list. There's plenty of applications and packages for Octave that are not part of Forge. That doesn't mean Octave Forge isn't primarily about packages and applications. What is this applications you keep talking about? There's only packages. You are thinking of applications as in hunk of software, I suspect. I'm speaking in terms of applied science, e.g., signal processing, civil engineering, image processing, statistics. Damn you homophones. Causing trouble since monkeys learned to talk. Yes and no. I often see discussions of bugs. Some bugs are straightforward and remain on the tracker. Some are either vague and difficult to solve and warrant help from others, hence discussion list. Some bugs expose an underlying weakness in design and warrant discussion about design modifications. That may be true in core. I do not remember that ever happening in forge. Considering the way development is done in Forge, I wouldn't consider this to ever be a problem. install package would be the conceptual development there--now stable. install package would already belong to the maintainers mailing list since it's handled by pkg, itself part of core. It is, however, a very good example of a maintainers discussion that developers of forge should be involved. Yes it is. Not one big change though, but slowly slowly seems to be the direction it's taking. It doesn't make sense to make that question yet, maybe it never will. But in the mean time, when things start to overlap, such as in the case of the mailing lists, it makes sense to merge them. We are not discussing more than just that, mailing lists. Getting rid of an active mailing list is more than a name change. That traffic has to go somewhere. I doubt the package concept is going away. We are merging 3 mailing lists, whose subjects have been overlapping too much and too often, into 2. -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Carnë Draug carandraug+...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 November 2012 01:01, Daniel J Sebald daniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: On 11/25/2012 04:10 PM, Carnė Draug wrote: On 25 November 2012 21:44, Daniel J Sebalddaniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: At the moment, the decision whether a thread belongs to the help or octave-dev mailing list is whether the reply is use package X from octave forge. I'll argue that most Octave users already use at least one of the Octave Forge packages. And I'll also argue that no one in Octave Forge uses all the Octave Forge packages. So if the question is how to use a function from an Octave Forge package, users on the help mailing list already are the right people to answer it. Keeping them separated makes no sense anymore. So there will be changes to the Octave webpage descriptions that consequently (or at least intend to) direct the bulk of OctDev to the h...@octave.org mailing list? Yes. That's why this is being discussed in the maintainers mailing list. There's plenty of applications and packages for Octave that are not part of Forge. That doesn't mean Octave Forge isn't primarily about packages and applications. What is this applications you keep talking about? There's only packages. You are thinking of applications as in hunk of software, I suspect. I'm speaking in terms of applied science, e.g., signal processing, civil engineering, image processing, statistics. Damn you homophones. Causing trouble since monkeys learned to talk. Yes and no. I often see discussions of bugs. Some bugs are straightforward and remain on the tracker. Some are either vague and difficult to solve and warrant help from others, hence discussion list. Some bugs expose an underlying weakness in design and warrant discussion about design modifications. That may be true in core. I do not remember that ever happening in forge. Considering the way development is done in Forge, I wouldn't consider this to ever be a problem. install package would be the conceptual development there--now stable. install package would already belong to the maintainers mailing list since it's handled by pkg, itself part of core. It is, however, a very good example of a maintainers discussion that developers of forge should be involved. Yes it is. Not one big change though, but slowly slowly seems to be the direction it's taking. It doesn't make sense to make that question yet, maybe it never will. But in the mean time, when things start to overlap, such as in the case of the mailing lists, it makes sense to merge them. We are not discussing more than just that, mailing lists. Getting rid of an active mailing list is more than a name change. That traffic has to go somewhere. I doubt the package concept is going away. We are merging 3 mailing lists, whose subjects have been overlapping too much and too often, into 2. I do agree with Carnë idea. In particular with the refinement proposed by jwe were everything gets merged to the current mailing lists. I do not really understand, the complication observed or proposed by Daniel (no ofense!). I think the issue is quite simple, so a simple solution should be enough. Cheers -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
Hi Carnë, On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 07:17:40PM +0100, Carnë Draug wrote: Hi everyone I'm proposing moving the current Octave Forge mailing list (octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net) to the same server as as the ones from Octave core. My suggestion is to have the following octave related mailing lists: * maintain...@octave.org - same as now, discussion of development of Octave core * fo...@octave.org - new mailing list for discussion of development of Octave Forge * h...@octave.org - mailing list for discussion of any help related to Octave (packages included) I'd vote for pro. But I'd call it packa...@octave.org, so it is clearer what is meant. Also, 'forge' relates to SourceForge, doesn't it? And who can be sure that the package repository will stick to SourceForge forever. ... Other reasons: * some e-mails are sent for more than one mailing list. If the same mailman server is handling them, this should prevent people from receiving 2 e-mails with the same subject. Really? It does not seem to be so with octave-help and octave-maintainers now. And actually I would like to see what list a mail was meant for, even if there was more than one destination. But I really think duplicating mails should be avoided at all. One reason for the suggested change could be to avoid duplicates. But it does not seem to avoid duplicates between 'forge' and octave-maintainers. Regards, Olaf ... -- public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 07:46:50PM +0100, Olaf Till wrote: ... And actually I would like to see what list a mail was meant for, even if there was more than one destination. Sorry, this part was nonsense. Please Forget it. Olaf -- public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
Re: [OctDev] moving Octave Forge mailing list to core's mailman server
On 23 November 2012 15:40, Daniel J Sebald daniel.seb...@ieee.org wrote: Still forge I wonder about. The term seems too broad and vague. Forge is a pretty generic term for a code sharing site, although SourceForge happens to be the most popular one. ForjaIris and GForge come to mind as alternative examples. - Jordi G. H. -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
