From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from elastic.org (unknown [IPv6:2600:3c03::f03c:91ff:fe50:73f]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69D1E39960DF; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:11:26 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 69D1E39960DF Received: from vpn-home.elastic.org ([10.0.0.2] helo=elastic.org) by elastic.org with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1jwUpQ-00049h-WB; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:11:25 +0000 Received: from fche by elastic.org with local (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1jwUpQ-0002D6-Gp; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:11:24 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:11:24 -0400 From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" To: Overseers mailing list Cc: overseers@gcc.gnu.org, "Maciej W. Rozycki" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Separate commit mailing lists for trunk/branches possible? Message-ID: <20200717181124.GC42713@elastic.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Sender-Verification: "" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: overseers@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Overseers mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:11:27 -0000 Hi - > Would it be reasonable to have the mailing list split into more than > one, that is at least the original covering the trunk, and then one > or more for branches? [...] (This matter is for the gcc community to decide. Overseers do not control git/mailing list traffic policy.) - FChE