Leo Sutic wrote:
Agreed with the general principle, even if our situation is a little different.From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
We also have to take into account the future subprojects of the Cocoon top-level project. In this perspective, the current Cocoon should be considered as the "core" of a group of related projects (CMS, GIS, webapp, etc.)
In that perspective, I don't like stripping the distinctive part of mailing lists for a generic "dev@" if there is to be some "xxx-dev@" in the future.
We did that in Avalon, with the (in hindsight predictable) results that
each little mailing list became a community of its own - we had people
working on Phoenix (then the Avalon reference container) who didn't know
about Avalon! (Only with the formation of the PMC did we merge
phoenix-dev back with avalon-dev.)
In short, Sylvain, you may not want to do what you plan for.
Cocoon doesn't have different concurrent and overlapping implementations (yet, considering word on embedded devices)
I do not expect (nor will like to see it happening) a different mail list for each different block and I would *not* like to see a different mail list for each cocoon implementation (actually, I would not like even to see a different CVS module for each cocoon implementation).
This community is strong and healthy, but this is not a quality that remains forever, it's something that always needs to be scrutinized and controlled.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate [William of Ockham]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
