Do you have the same feelings for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that I do wish the S/N ratio on members@ were better (it has gotten better as of late). But, it also exists as a communication channel for members. So, it's required such that conversations with the membership can occur electronically and privately.
It seems to me that members@ is akin to a community-dev list, while community@ is akin to a community-users list. Any reason to keep members@ should exist for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
community@ has no foundational requirement for its presence. It's also optional - lots of people ostensibly in our community unsubscribed or never subscribed because of the poor S/N ratio. members@ isn't optional in that sense...
list. Go read groklaw. However, discussions on whether a python community should exist seem to be perfectly designed for the community list (unless they cross-post to all python interested mailing lists), as it pertains to the future of how Apache balances itself.
Language-oriented TLPs have repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be poor overseers of code. The 'balancing of the ASF' brings back horrors of the reorg@ list which was another of those misguided lists... -- justin
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
