Ok, I'm confused now for what we voted for. In Jan second proposal, there was nothing about moving Fauton out of dev@, but about to create of code@ for JIRA and GitHub emails and I was sure that moving automatically generated code-related emails to special ML in order to make dev@ traffic more "human" is what it solves. Happens it doesn't? -- ,,,^..^,,,
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Joan Touzet <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to Noah's proposal, -1 to an additional separate Fauxton list. > All of the Fauxton traffic I see is GH related and if I really > wanted Fauxton traffic in a different folder, the filter rule is > trivial. > > Once GH traffic is off of dev@ it will become readable again. And > the monthly reminder will help people to know that things are not > dead. > > I haven't thought carefully enough about whether JIRA traffic should > follow GH traffic to another list. Right now the volume is > substantially less. > > -Joan > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Noah Slater" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 7:40:19 AM >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Move Fauxton to its own mailing list? >> >> I thought we'd already discussed moving this stuff to another list. >> See >> "[PROPOSAL] Move transactional email out of dev@" sent around this >> time >> last month. >> >> The last email on that thread was me suggesting we kick off a DISCUSS >> thread. >> >> My proposal was: >> >> > I am +1 for GitHub PRs moving to something like reviews@ >> >> Joan added that she wants to have a monthly reminder sent to dev@ >> about >> where this traffic is going. >> >> Other people then suggested this ML handle JIRA traffic too. >> >> Your proposal in this thread is to move JIRA *and* GitHub to code@, >> which >> echos that. Though I think if we're sending all this stuff here, >> something >> like automated@ is more accurate. >> >> It's not clear to me that we have consensus on bunching up all >> automated >> emails and moving them to a new list. As I see it, that is one >> option. >> Another option is to split it by source, so one for GitHub, one for >> JIRA, >> etc. Any others? >> >> >> On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 at 00:08 Klaus Trainer <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > +1 >> > >> > >> > On 02/18/2015 02:34 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: >> > > Hey all, >> > > >> > > I’m wondering how you would feel to give the Fauxton team their >> > > own >> > mailing list for discussions and GitHub notifications? >> > > >> > > In my view, the Fauxton project is generating enough traffic to >> > > warrant >> > it’s own space :) >> > > >> > > I’d propose [email protected] >> > > >> > > Best >> > > Jan >> > > -- >> > > >> > >>
