---Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 16, 1998 at 05:01:57PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > > > Well, now that the Debian ports generate a lot of postings in > > > > debian-devel-changes, I think it is time to split that list by > > > > architecture. > > > > > > Why not just use scoring in Gnus? > > > > We not just create different lists for different architectures? > > > > [ I'm an i386 user. Do you really think I should *receive* all > > those alpha, m68k, sparc, etc. announcements? ] > > Are you completely uninterested how the ports are going on?
Maybe an acceptable compromise would be to have debian-devel-changes and debian-changes receive all announcements of source uploads, and a debian-<arch>-changes (where <arch> is (i386|m68k|powerpc|merced|6502|whatever)) for binary uploads. So a "i386 m68k source" package would generate mails to debian-devel-changes, debian-i386-changes and debian-m68k-changes (or 68k changes if you want to be consistent with the mailing list name). "all" packages would go to all <arch>-changes lists (since they affect all architectures). That would allow separate channels to be monitored for users (who will mainly be interested in <arch> mails) and for porters (who, I'm assuming, will be interested in devel-changes [maybe source-changes would be a better name?] mails). Chris, who's spammed people with m68k uploads and is currently being spammed by sparc and alpha uploads. == Chris Lawrence Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Political Science Major University of Memphis Contract Programmer Memphis, Tennessee, USA FedEx - Operations Research _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
