* Multiple copies of messages
@ 2005-01-04 17:53 mskala
2005-01-04 19:31 ` Eric McDonald
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: mskala @ 2005-01-04 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xconq-general, xconq7
I wonder if there's a way we could either reduce the current cross-posting
of messages, or lessen its impact. We have four discussion mailing lists
on SourceForge, as well as the one on sources.redhat.com. Quite often a
given message will be relevant to two of the SourceForge lists, so it gets
crossposted to both of those, but then it'll also be crossposted to the
redhat.com list because lots of people haven't subscribed to the
SourceForge lists yet, and the lists are configured to encourage direct
CC:s of replies to the original poster, so if I've previously participated
in a discussion I'll probably be on the CC: list as well, and so the end
result is that I usually get three or four copies of every message. I
have to manually skip the extra copies, and it seems quite likely that I
could miss seeing something important because I deleted it thinking it was
a duplicate of something else.
Is the CC:-to-original-poster thing really a good idea? Do we still need
the sources.redhat.com mailing list? Would it be possible to move the
subscriber list from sources.redhat.com to sourceforge, to lessen the
impact of closing the older list? Is there a way to configure
SourceForge's mailing-list software to only send one copy of a given
message to one recipient, across mailing lists?
--
Matthew Skala
mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca Embrace and defend.
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Multiple copies of messages
2005-01-04 17:53 Multiple copies of messages mskala
@ 2005-01-04 19:31 ` Eric McDonald
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Eric McDonald @ 2005-01-04 19:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xconq7; +Cc: xconq-general
Hi Matthew, welcome back,
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
> on SourceForge, as well as the one on sources.redhat.com. Quite often a
> given message will be relevant to two of the SourceForge lists, so it gets
> crossposted to both of those, but then it'll also be crossposted to the
> redhat.com list because lots of people haven't subscribed to the
> SourceForge lists yet, and the lists are configured to encourage direct
> CC:s of replies to the original poster, so if I've previously participated
> in a discussion I'll probably be on the CC: list as well, and so the end
> result is that I usually get three or four copies of every message.
I've been contemplating this same issue lately.
I'll look at the mailman settings for the lists tonight.
As far as CC'ing the Redhat list is concerned, I am willing to
quit doing that any time now. The Sourceforge listserv has shown
itself to just as reliable as the Redhat one, albeit with a
slower turnaround time. There are/were two reasons for CC'ing the
Redhat list: (1) As you mention, not everyone migrated. (2) This
whole jaunt over at Sourceforge was just intended to be a test to
see if SF.net could meet our needs. I believe that it has proven
reliable so far. My only complaints are that they are not
currently tracking CVS commits and adds, and that there is about 8
hour lag time between a CVS commit, and when it propagates to the
world-facing CVS pserver. However, I have no problems with CVS
checkout or commit failures. But, back to the mailings lists__, I
think Sourceforge has shown that it could be the "official" home
of Xconq. If Stan gives his stamp of approval to this, I will
forgo the 'xconq7' mailing list.
Stan, if you're reading this, can we make the official site of
Xconq be at Sourceforge? Also, you are invited to be a project
admin on the Sourceforge site; just let me know the SF user ID
that should be added to the project.
> Would it be possible to move the
> subscriber list from sources.redhat.com to sourceforge, to lessen the
> impact of closing the older list?
That is a possibility, though whoever has access to the Redhat
mailing list manager would have to arrange for this. Also, it
would probably be good to get a nod of general consent from those
"affected" by the move.
Eric
P.S. It may be wondered why SF has 5 mailing lists (general,
developers, hackers, players, and cvs), whereas
sources.redhat.com only has 3 ([main list], cvs, and announce). I
thought it might be nice to separate the general discussion from
the developer and hacker discussions so as not to scare off Xconq
newbies. The cross-posting problem did not seem to be a major
problem in my mind when I was first structuring the lists.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-01-04 19:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-01-04 17:53 Multiple copies of messages mskala
2005-01-04 19:31 ` Eric McDonald
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).