Stuff that requires human intervention should stay prominent. The rest can go away. :-)
2017-10-12 23:06 GMT+02:00 Ralph Goers <[email protected]>: > It will also make the quarterly board reports more accurate. > reporter.apache.org provides the number of emails received on the list > during the quarter. In my view, having the GitHub, Jira, Jenkins, etc > emails on the dev list skews things as they dominate they number of “real” > discussion emails that happen on the list, which is what I think is the > important part of what the board wants to know. > > Ralph > > > On Oct 12, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If it makes email filter rules easier to configure, I'd say go for it. > It'd > > be just like the commits@ list though with floods of emails coming in > every > > so often that I just have to skip over (e.g., rebasing a long lived > branch). > > > > On 12 October 2017 at 15:45, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> I do not care either way. > >> > >> Gary > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Ralph Goers < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> What do others think about the idea of creating a separate mailing list > >>> for emails generated by tools? This list gets a bit noisy from all the > >>> extra emails and I have a hard time filtering this list because of how > >> some > >>> of the emails are generated. > >>> > >>> I would also say that we expect every committer to be subscribed to > that > >>> list. > >>> > >>> Ralph > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > -- Dominik Psenner
