On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > I consider this an edge case that I, again, am happy to find a technical > solution for. Until then, I do it by hand. Making automatic two-way-sync > a blocker seems overly zealous to me, when the whole idea is to get info > to dev@ that is currently not on dev@ and clearly harms the visibility > of the dev efforts of the project today (and as Noah points out for the > past 24 or so months).
Automating this would be great and I would use it elsewhere. I wish github had this built in. > And now that we are bringing this up we get all sorts of FUD how this > is bad and I fail to understand why getting relevant data to dev@ is > in anyway bad and should not be implemented because there is some more > automation to be done. I agree that it's not a blocker to have only one way. Plenty of projects use Github to coordinate development and still have need for a mailing list. GIthub will not come to dominate dev@. As long as we, eventually, deliver 2-way sync, we ensure that no one is barred from contributing to the bulk of conversation. This is a fun problem, but arguing about it isn't. +1 on PRs to dev@ +1 on Jan taking point to deliver 2-way -0 on him doing it manually for any period of time. Don't do this unless you want to :).
