| Philip Olson 2007-08-25, 4:01 am |
| > 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
I have mixed feelings so will share them now.
I like the single list because it means users subscribe to one doc
list and then peer review all the happenings on said list. In this
sense, we (including lurkers) are forced to love it all. And
typically, this list is low volume averaging ~10 posts per day.
Multiple lists feels good because each list has a defined purpose,
and allows for easier more manageable perusing of topics. And
sometimes the single list gets too noisy, like when Jakub attacks the
bug database or when Hannes goes wild with PhD. Also, this might mean
we communicate more on the list which I'd like very much.
Overall I'm in favour of multiple lists and while doing so would like
to create a tool that'll send the main list a w ly email that
reveals information like number of open bugs, number of closed bugs
and commit info made during the past w... still thinking about
this but it seems like a good idea (and doable) so far. But not a
priority. And translations can remain as single lists.
As for a separate list for tools, I don't find that necessary but can
go either way. Once the new build system is in place hopefully we'll
do more with docweb instead of phpdoc/scripts/ and a docweb list
already exists for that.
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?
Regards,
Philip
|