I'm with Fergal on this. Not sure I see a need for yet another list. We already have nupic-hackers, which is supposed to be for all code related discussions. We have been pretty lax about it though. Perhaps we should just do a better job of policing nupic-discuss and be more aggressive about moving code/implementation discussions/bug reports/nupic.core discussions, etc. over to nupic-hackers? Should we try that first and see how it goes?
Having said that, if everyone really wants to create a third list it wouldn't affect me too much. --Subutai On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Matthew Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > I want to point out that if we do this, Jeff Hawkins will likely only be > subscribed to the nupic-theory list. > > --------- > Matt Taylor > OS Community Flag-Bearer > Numenta > > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Matthew Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If I created a nupic-theory mailing list, which strictly contained >> discussion only about the theory and principles behind CLA & HTM, >> would you sign up for it? Or do you think two MLs is enough for now? >> >> Thanks, >> --------- >> Matt Taylor >> OS Community Flag-Bearer >> Numenta >> > > > _______________________________________________ > nupic mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org > >
_______________________________________________ nupic mailing list [email protected] http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org
