At 09:31 AM 10/10/00 -0600, John Barnette wrote:
>D'you think it's a possibility to provide read-only access to the lists
>for interested parties? I'm certainly not competent enough to contribute
>to a core discussion, for example, but I have no doubt that my eventual
>Perl6 facility would be greatly increased by observing the dialogue.
Read-only access is a must for any list like this, and with more than just
a web archive. I'm sure Ask will set things up so anyone that likes can
subscribe to the read-only version of the list.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
- RE: Continued RFC process David Grove
- Re: Continued RFC process Simon Cozens
- Re: Continued RFC process Dave Storrs
- Re: Continued RFC process Simon Cozens
- Re: Continued RFC process Russ Allbery
- RE: Continued RFC process David Grove
- RE: Continued RFC process Nathan Torkington
- RE: Continued RFC process Andy Dougherty
- Re: Continued RFC process Nathan Wiger
- Re: Continued RFC process John Barnette
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Uri Guttman
- Re: Continued RFC process Nicholas Clark
- Re: Continued RFC process Daniel Chetlin
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Russ Allbery
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Nathan Wiger
- Re: Continued RFC process Will Coleda - IMG
- RE: Continued RFC process Bryan C . Warnock
- RE: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
