Hi all! On 1 Aug., 17:18, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote: > On 8/1/11 7:19 AM, Simon King wrote: > > > sage-newbie, sage-solaris, sage-flame, sage-marketing and sage-edu > > together made up for 133 posts in six months. Moving all of it to sage- > > devel would mean an increment of about 4%. If part of it was moved to > > sage-support instead, the increment would be even less. > > sage-flame is an important separate release valve for anything on sage > lists. I certainly don't think it should be merged with anything else. > > +1 for disbanding sage-marketing and merging that with sage-devel. +1 > for disbanding sage-newbie (encourage sage-support instead) and merging > sage-solaris with sage-devel, and maybe even merging sage-windows with > sage-devel.
Then I ask directly: 1. Is it technically possible to merge two existing Google groups? 2. Do we want less Google groups for Sage? To summarise what I've been arguing above: I. New contributors are likely to post on the big lists. Having many small lists can lead to one of the following situations: (a) Experienced people are busy on the small lists, thus, read sage- support less frequently, thus, the big lists are less responsive. (b) Experienced people ask to move the question to one of the smaller lists, thus, the question remains unanswered for longer than necessary. Both is frustrating for novices. The situation four years ago was much different. Both sage-devel and sage-support were very responsive, and that has been one major reason for choosing Sage as a platform for my computational projects. II. Having a combined list for sage-nt, sage-algebra and sage-combinat- devel would (according to figures from the past 6 months) result in a list with little more than 7 posts per day. That should be small enough so that all people interested in abstract nonsense could easily follow - actually more easily than with three lists. In particular when interested people are only subscribed to two of them. III. Moving sage-solaris, sage-flame, sage-marketing and sage-edu to sage- devel would yield an increment of (in average) less than one post per day on sage-devel. I believe nobody can reasonably say that such a little increment is a "flood with tons of technical details". A single additional post per day could easily be filtered manually (i.e., ignored), if necessary. IV. sage-marketing and sage-edu concern topics which are perhaps not in the centre of everybody's research interests. However, most are at a university and could occasionally contribute to sage-edu, and I guess that most people would at least have an opinion on marketing and could occasionally contribute to sage-marketing (ok, that could be "painting a bike shed"). Hence, why hiding these two topics from a larger audience, putting them into a small list? V. sage-windows discusses a topic that is said to be a major goal of Sage. Hence, why not underlining its importance? Why not raising alertness by exposing it to the "big audience"? Cheers, Simon -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
