Hello!
On Fri, Oct 08, 1999 at 07:04:07AM -0400, Paul Hudak wrote:
Perhaps we should create a comp.lang.haskell? -Paul
Frankly, I think there's still enough room in c.l.functional for Haskell
related threads. However, if a discussion and vote comes up for a
Haskell newsgroup, I'll off course
| I also agree with Simon that simply making this a moderated list is
| not the solution. Perhaps splitting is best. How about
|
| haskell-info
| haskell-talk
|
| where info carries *brief* announcements, requests for information
| and responses to such requests, and talk carries anything and
So we can decide to do one of two things:
1. Try to keep the Haskell mailing list as a low-traffic list, to which
many, many people subscribe. Under this model, one might *start*
a discussion on the Haskell list; but after a few exchanges, move the
discussion to
Traffic on the Haskell mailing list has jumped dramatically of late.
[...]
So we can decide to do one of two things:
1. Try to keep the Haskell mailing list as a low-traffic list, to which
many, many people subscribe. Under this model, one might *start*
a discussion on the Haskell
Perhaps we should create a comp.lang.haskell? -Paul
Colin Runciman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also agree with Simon that simply making this a moderated list is
not the solution. Perhaps splitting is best. How about
haskell-info
haskell-talk
where info carries *brief* announcements, requests for information
and responses to such
Simon PJ is too valuable to lose. I
(a) second the creation of comp.lang.haskell;
(b) suggest that [EMAIL PROTECTED] should have a policy
(enforced mechanically if necessary) of 1 contribution of length
at most 5 lines (or 350 characters) per user per thread.
"Manuel" == Manuel M T Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Manuel What do you think?
I'll use the opportunity to advocate wiki usage.
While I agree that it seems time to have multiple lists, some of the
recent high volume threads could have used the wiki to collect,
discuss and then
