On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<[email protected]> wrote:
> TJ,
>
> I am not entirely comfortable having [email protected] 
> (the correct list), and maybe the other forward to a non-Apache location, 
> though I think it would be valuable to support the authors@ d.oo.o address.
>
> An intermediate solution would be to create ooo-documentation @i.a.o now (it 
> looks like there is at least one willing moderator already) and forward to 
> that.  The ODFAuthors could certainly subscribe to that.   The footer 
> provided on ooo-documentation list forwardings could even include a link to a 
> wiki page description of other places to discuss documentation, provide 
> feedback, contribute documents, reviews and edits, etc.
>

Rather than creating another list on speculation that it might get
sufficient traffic, could we just forward the legacy address to
ooo-dev?  If it ends up generating sufficient traffic then it will be
easy enough to create a dedicated list for it.  But I'm not in favor
of creating a new list for it at this point.

-Rob


> How does that sound?
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TJ Frazier [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 02:49
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [odfauthors-discuss] Feedback link for our documents
>
> [ ... ]
>
> The actual use, i.e., valuable traffic, on those lists is very small,
> but still important. I get one or two "nibbles" per week, from newcomers
> wanting to help with documentation. My boilerplate reply sends them to
> the wiki page, or even to LO.
>
> I would strongly suggest that these two @oo.o addresses be forwarded to
> ODFA (assuming they want that – we should ask), unless and until we
> establish our own doc ML, and not forever; probably until we consider
> OO.o v3.x obsolete. To use a famous figure, 500K addresses might
> over-stress ezmlm, but two shouldn't.
>
> [ ... ]
>

Reply via email to