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