The apache list seems to work… Why change? It's easy to search via Markmail… Maybe someone should place a link for searching the archives with it somewhere?
Additionally, you do realize that Google groups basically requires (or creates) a G+ account nowadays right? Not sure what the benefit other than building a more 'social couchdb forum' on G+ would be. IMHO the Google Groups wouldn't be any different than the apache list - other than you'd be fragmenting the user base. Google Groups is also somewhat painful to search - they can be indexed w/ Markmail too. BTW… if you are participating on this list… you ARE doing social… just not the FB, G+, Twitter way… but the old skool email way. Sorry to disappoint. Jim Klo Senior Software Engineer Center for Software Engineering SRI International t. @nsomnac On Dec 10, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Mark Hahn <[email protected]> wrote: > Wouldn't google groups make more sense? I follow about a dozen > technical projects on google groups. Couchdb is the only hold-out for > some bizarre reason. I suspect apache uses the last-century mailing > list technology because of their old roots. > > I personally won't touch FB or G+. I don't do social and I've tried > both. They are too aggressive. > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> For those who are on Google+, I've created a community to share and discuss >> about of Apache CouchDB. Let's join us here: >> >> https://plus.google.com/communities/112687873154936256826 >> >> - benoît
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
