Any progress on the full disks?

Any progress on the full disks?

[Nathanael Nerode]

It's now over 72 hours without mailing list archives for gcc.  Is there 
an ETA for when they'll start archiving again, or should we settle in 
for the long haul?

--Nathanael

Re: Any progress on the full disks?

[Jason Molenda]

On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 11:37:37AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> It's now over 72 hours without mailing list archives for gcc.  Is there 
> an ETA for when they'll start archiving again, or should we settle in 
> for the long haul?

Yeah, I'm on it.

The overseers list has web archives, BTW.

Re: Any progress on the full disks?

[Benjamin Kosnik]

>The overseers list has web archives, BTW.

Note that the overseers web archive is not linked from either of:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml

But it can be found here:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/overseers/current

-benjamin

Re: Any progress on the full disks?

[Jason Molenda]

Yeah, that's intentional.  I wanted users/developers to first turn
to their project maintainers, and when the project maintainers
thought the issue should go to overseers it'd be sent there.  I'm
not especially interested in seeing e-mails from people who've
downloaded gcc and want to learn C, and how should they go about
it, and how they didn't get a reply from the gcc list and they'd
like to lodge a formal complaint.

Actually, I'd originally thought that RH would allocate staffing
resources to the box and most of the day-to-day stuff could just
go to that person or persons, with overseers reserved for maintainers
conversation about how the systme is ste up.  But it's ended up
being a volunteer effort and overseers is the best contact addr
for many of the site problems that come up.

As it stands, overseers is a very poorly kept secret, and I don't
have any problem with that; it was never obscured to increase its
cabal-like qualities - it was obscured to keep out the hoi polloi.  :-)

J


On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 03:01:31PM -0600, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> >The overseers list has web archives, BTW.
> 
> Note that the overseers web archive is not linked from either of:
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml
> 
> But it can be found here:
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/overseers/current
> 
> -benjamin

Re: Any progress on the full disks?

[Phil Edwards]

On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 01:17:59PM -0800, Jason Molenda wrote:
> Yeah, that's intentional.  I wanted users/developers to first turn
> to their project maintainers, and when the project maintainers
> thought the issue should go to overseers it'd be sent there.  I'm
> not especially interested in seeing e-mails from people who've
> downloaded gcc and want to learn C, and how should they go about
> it, and how they didn't get a reply from the gcc list and they'd
> like to lodge a formal complaint.

IMHO, keeping the "unsubscribe me!!!" requests out of overseers is alone
worth the effort.


Phil

-- 
I would therefore like to posit that computing's central challenge, viz. "How
not to make a mess of it," has /not/ been met.
                                                 - Edsger Dijkstra, 1930-2002