On 8/25/07, Philip Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This question has been raised few times but no actions taken yet... > > > > If nobody objects I would like* to split this mailing list up into: > > - phpdoc-cvs@ > > Containing all the CVS commits > > - phpdoc-bugs@ > > Gets all the mails from the bug tracker > > - phpdoc@ > > The day-to-day communication > > > > There have been few suggestions to split the CVS list in two, one for > > "tools related" commits and one for the "usual manual commits". The > > "tools related" commits would be commits to scripts/ docbook/ phpbook/ > > livedocs/ and phd/ > > That would give the people who only want to work on the tools an > > opportunity to keep track of what is going on there without the > > "noise" of manual commits. > > I tend to like that suggestion but I don't mind having it on the > > same list. > > > > * Translation: get Derick/Wez/systems@ to do it > [snip] > > Summary: Let's do it. However, I prefer doc-cvs@ and doc-bugs@ but > keep phpdoc@ for historical reasons even though it would be nice to > change it to doc@ including the cvs module name. Still thinking about > that one... what does everyone else think?
I don't think renaming phpdoc@ to doc@ is such a good idea since the modules are called phpdoc[-*] and physically renaming them on the cvs server is just wrong (and will break aaaaaloooot of scripts and checkouts and other stuff out there). doc-cvs@ and doc-bugs@ however is fine with me. -Hannes
