Moving BFAV traffic off of squeak-dev short-term (was Re: BFAV
email prefix?)
Bert Freudenberg
bert at isg.cs.uni-magdeburg.de
Tue Aug 12 10:04:42 UTC 2003
Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> Hmm, I'm against moving the process wholesale off the list. This might
> disconnect it enough from the eyes of the community to make it hard to
> sustain.
Don't you think a daily summary would suffice to keep the wider
community informed? Like "
From: Harvesting News Bot
Subject: [HOT] New stuff on the harvesting front
Please join the efforts to improve Squeak over at the harvest list!
Today's topics:
[FIX] Make CoffeeMaker respect import restrictions (F.O'Reigner)
[ENH] CoffeeMaker now supports both sugar and cream (R. Sweety, 1 reply)
[BUG] CoffeeMaker default does not add water (A. McOffee, 3 replies)
"
> If it isn't too much trouble, I think the choice of whether any specific
> message should be public or not should be made by the person making it.
> So the UI should include two options (submit, submit publically), that
> represent the new and the old list, and the archive should listen to
> both, or both should be redirected to the archive.
More options == bad. The harvest list should be as public as squeak-dev
itself.
-- Bert
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|