As long the subject clearly identifies a last call request thread, I
don't see why the LC's cannot stay here.
There are already too many mailing lists in the world.
My humble opinion.
~Carlos
On 6/7/13 5:00 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 6/7/13 11:52 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Rule 1 for
On 06/08/2013 02:52 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Rule 1 for complex and divergent mail threads is to change the
Subject header when the subject changes. If you don't do that,
your mail is rather likely to get junked.
I think that IETF last call threads should stay on the main IETF
discussion
I believe that last calls must stay on this ietf list.
Any last-call-only list must be *in addition* to the ietf list, with all
announcements crossposted, and anyone sensitive to general discussion can
subscribe to that instead.
Last calls need wide exposure.
(I'm acked in at least one RFC as
On Jun 8, 2013, at 6:09 AM, l.w...@surrey.ac.uk l.w...@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
I believe that last calls must stay on this ietf list.
Any last-call-only list must be *in addition* to the ietf list, with all
announcements crossposted, and anyone sensitive to general discussion can
subscribe
Rule 1 for complex and divergent mail threads is to change the
Subject header when the subject changes. If you don't do that,
your mail is rather likely to get junked.
I think that IETF last call threads should stay on the main IETF
discussion list. That is exactly the right place for them.
It's
On 6/7/13 11:52 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Rule 1 for complex and divergent mail threads is to change the
Subject header when the subject changes. If you don't do that,
your mail is rather likely to get junked.
I think that IETF last call threads should stay on the main IETF
discussion
I have mixed opinions, filters in general work well (some false
positives like these ones that are moved to my Last Call filter) but
in general it is ok.
But I would not oppose to a new list for LC only.
Regards,
as
On 6/7/13 4:52 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
I think that IETF
