On Sunday 27 May 2001 04:24 pm, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> I'm all for removing the inactive mailing lists, those that you say
> "could be recycled" or "freeze". If they're needed for implementation
> work later, we can recreate them at that time. If they have no
> specific task to accomplish, they have no reason to exist.
Okay.
>
> We'd need Chip's okay to close the Topaz list. I don't know what he
> would like to do with it. I don't anticipate a porters list, probably
> more like -patches, -submitters, and -core (along the lines of
> FreeBSD). We can decide how that will work when we actually have code
> to maintain, though.
Makes sense. We could just state that perl6-porters isn't
(directly) related to any of the perl6- lists.
> > Ask, I can send you a revamped page after the details have been
> > worked out (barring Warnock's Dilemma).
>
> Oh dear, dare I ask "Warnock's Dilemma" is?
David Mitchell's label
(http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02558.html) of my
extreme pessimism and paranoia at posting (as explained at
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01126.html).
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
