* Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-03-18 23:55]: > On the one hand we want a TAP list in which we can discuss the > protocol independent of its implementation or Perl. Then its > said to merge the discussion about the details of the > TAP::Parser Perl implementation into the Perl and > implementation independent TAP mailing list. > > Does not compute. > > What did you intend to gain by merging the TAP::Parser list > into the TAP list?
Well, as long as the discussions about TAP remain firmly on the TAP list, that might be OK. If the TAP::Parser list deals purely with implementation details that are truly irrelevant to TAP per se, maybe they shoud stay separate. But the volume of discussion might not be high enough to sustain multiple lists, even if the topical split is correct, and having discussions about details of TAP implementation in several different language on the same TAP list might be healthy for the protocol. I see this mistake made in lots of messageboards on the web, where people eagerly set up a hundred forums for specific topics, and then none of them gets any traffic. It’s better to throw it all together at first, and split the discussion only when the volume necessitates it. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
