> Jon Skeet wrote: > > Ant does (even though it's not listed), Avalon does - > > others may do too. > > Ant does NOT.
Really? I've got a load of mails (including various today) which have a "To" field of [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the other hand, those mails come with an ant-dev unsubscribed message at the bottom :( I'm happy to admit I've got less idea than you about this kind of thing, so an explanation would be much appreciated, as I'm pretty confused atm :) > You are correct that Avalon does. At the > moment, log4j and > avalon are the only subprojects with separate cvs mailing lists. > (Jakarta's site has only a cvs mailing list). > > My feeling, for what it is worth: merging the -dev and -cvs > mailing lists has two effects: (1) cvs commits get a larger audience, > and (2) non-developers flee to the -user mailing list. I consider > both effects positive. The latter I see as positive - the former I'm less sure about. My world view at the moment (the one where Ant has a CVS list) is that when I subscribed to ant-dev I was automatically subscribed to ant-cvs as well. That seemed like a good idea to me, in that it maintained the segregation very simply, gave me the granularity I might want in the future, but exposed me to CVS by default. Perhaps what's actually happening with Ant is that ant-cvs is an alias for ant-dev? If so, I'd at least like to ask that if something similar could be set up for Log4j, that would be handy. Filtering by "To" field is rather nicer than filtering by subject. I'm not nearly as bothered by this as I might seem, by the way - I just tend to speak up when I'm asked for my opinion :) Jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
