Stephen Frost writes ("Re: (forw) [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Posting on the list [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: md5sum <FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]"): > The TC isn't the only committee in Debian. [...]
FSVO `committee', this is true. But the TC is the only one that's formally established and can't really be worked round if it breaks. It's also at the top of an `appeal pyramid', if you see what I mean. That means it tends to have the most experienced (and so busiest) people on it. > As tbm (I think?) mentioned, Debian spamfiltering will be getting an > upgrade soon as well. As for your own spamfilters, I'm not really > expecting alot of people to jump up and down and bitch if they're in > place for the mailing lists you're on. [...] I'm afraid I didn't make myself. My spamfilter doesn't _throw away_ mails that it doesn't like, it rejects them at the SMTP level. It uses criteria that are really only available during the _initial_ connection from an untrusted host. Both of these things mean that it doesn't work to run it on mail once it has been `laundered' by Debian's machines: firstly, the false positives would just vanish rather than bouncing, and secondly, its hitrate is hugely reduced. > Do other people on the committee feel this way? What about people who > have to monitor other lists (Manoj?)? Honestly, this seems kind of > silly to me as a reason to differentiate debian-ctte from the rest of > the mailing lists Debian hosts when, really, pretty much all of them > fall into much the same category. Perhaps I should offer to host the TC list myself. I could get the admins to delegate a mail domain under debian.org, and we could make mail to the old addresses bounce. Ian.