On 06/14/2009 12:52 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Boaz Harrosh<bharr...@panasas.com> wrote:
>> On 06/11/2009 08:41 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
>>> It seems like we have a lot of members on the list that are not kernel
>>> developers, but we now have 5 iscsi drivers (qla4xxx, bnx2i, cxgb3i,
>>> iscsi_tcp and ib_iser) with another being written. So it seems like we
>>> are going to have lots of patches. I would also like to start sending my
>>> kernel patches out in a way that everyone can see them. Previously to
>>> avoid noise on this list, I have been pinging you guys privately which
>>> just does not work so well now when we have so many people.
>>> What do you people think?
>>> Do other people on the list prefer to see everything here, so you can
>>> see what features are making progress?
>> I vote: One list, All patches posted
> I agree that having just one mailing list is the most convenient for
> kernel developers. But not everyone who is subscribed to open-iscsi is
> a kernel developer. Wouldn't it be more convenient for iSCSI users to
> have two lists -- one intended for iSCSI users, and one for iSCSI
> developers, such that the users can subscribe to the former only ?
> Just my two cents.
> Bart.

>From my experience this makes users loos on the Kernel guys.
Kernel guys are busy, and mind their own business, but
if a question comes up, which they know the answer they would
occasionally participate. Splitting will loos that.

I think iscsi mailing-list is not that big and still easy
to monitor. Just set your mailer to view by thread, and
it's easy to jump over threads that are not interesting.

My $0.017

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi

Reply via email to