On May 25, 2005, at 9:12 AM, Neil Graham wrote:
Hi all,
If one of the outcomes of moving Xerces to a TLP was to engender
closer
co-operation--or at least better understanding--between the
subprojects,
separating commit lists wouldn't seem to be the best way of achieving
this. Also, with a fair cross-section of the active committers
active as
PMC members--who have to monitor all commits--I'm not sure how many
folks
would benefit from this, even in principle.
Hi Neil,
Commit emails are a fairly in-your-face way of engendering
communication between subprojects. Sort of like working for family
harmony by requiring everybody to inform all family members before
they visit the bathroom.
As I mentioned earlier, it's quite easy to subscribe to multiple
lists if you want all the commits, and even (given mail client
technology) to integrate all these messages back into one mailbox, if
you really want to do so. But given that there's no overlap between
the codebases of the projects, it really makes sense for it to come
as multiple mail streams.
Separating the streams wouldn't hurt anybody who wants all the
commits, and would greatly benefit anybody who wants only half of
them. My commit-emails box for xerces holds mail back through 2003,
at present. About 4000 emails. 1500 of those are for java, and I've
never read more than the subject of any of them. Except for the time
recently when I saw something about xerces 2.7 and got confused,
thinking it was about xerces c ;) Does this encourage understanding,
or simply add to information overload?
A better way of getting understanding between the subprojects might
be a semi-regular (monthly?) summary about what they're each up to,
sent to each of the mailing lists. Information like that is at a
higher semantic level and far more likely to be appreciated and
understood.
-jdb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
