Sebastien Roy wrote: > ... > For the particular case you're bringing up, I'm not sure what kinds of > thoughts you're soliciting.
Any :) > Clearly we need project teams to be included in their cases > discussions, and posting to both psarc-ext _and_ the project mailing > list is the only way to do that. I'm not 100% convinced that this is true. Around 18% of the 421 cases in 2007 had a discuss@/core@/team@ in the Interest field,bso either a lot of cases don't have project teams or the feeling of the need to work in this way is not very wide spread. That's up from 14% of the 340 in 2006 (~14 % in 2005, ~12% in 2004. > What's the problem with this (other than that OpenSolaris mailing > lists are completely broken, but that's another topic entirely)? The most direct problem is being told your email is being held because of indirect addressing - but this might be the "brokeness" you're referring to ;) This is somehow tied up with your email going somewhere that you never realised it would (when I got the alert from clearview-discuss, I was like WTF did I get that, so I went hunting...) Another problem is if there is subject matter that needs to be discussed on psarc@, and not psarc-ext@, that is relevant to the case, it isn't clear to me how that would be both kept private and filed in the correct case mail log if there is an @opensolaris.org entry in the Interest field. Project email aliases today, on opensolaris, have a much larger audience and it isn't always reasonable to expect them all to be ARC savvy. The outcome of this is that people can suddenly be exposed to and part of a discussion without understanding the rules (c.f the ksh93 case mail explosion.) That isn't necessarily desirable. Darren
