Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:41606
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 192.18.6.24 as permitted sender)
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 23:46:59 +0100
In-reply-to: <7f3ed2c30810311313i48390eaat279d88fe291b9f16@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: Johannes.Schlueter@Sun.COM
To: Hannes Magnusson <hannes.magnusson@gmail.com>
Cc: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>,
        Lukas Kahwe Smith <mls@pooteeweet.org>,
        PHP Development <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <1225493220.3254.39.camel@goldfinger.johannes.nop>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <2077BA98-A58A-4EBD-8088-413654E878BC@pooteeweet.org>
 <490B5CC5.8040808@lerdorf.com>
 <7f3ed2c30810311252x7c4f1cb9ydd41a273f4089311@mail.gmail.com>
 <490B639A.8050905@lerdorf.com>
 <7f3ed2c30810311313i48390eaat279d88fe291b9f16@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] keeping traffic on this list manageable
From: johannes@php.net (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=)

On Fri, 2008-10-31 at 21:13 +0100, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> > This is the same as just making internals@ read-only.  Once we have an
> > internals-core, many core people will just unsubscribe from the internals
> > list.  I know I probably would.  And once the core developers no longer read
> > it, it becomes php-general2 and it ends up excluding people from the
> > development process.
> 
> I have more faith in our devs then that. And I doubt you would
> unsubscribe, you care to much (and one of the few devs I've seen to
> reply to posts on php-general@ and then pear-dev@ the next day..).
> Most of us do. You would probably filter those posts into a different
> reading priority, but you would still browse through it.

I assume some people would still be subscribed to it but just scroll
over subjects from time to time with little interest, which might be
frustrating to worthfull new contributors.

Additionally I guess it would split discussions, so a "core" person
proposes something to internals-readonly, then discussions happen on
both lists with some cross-postings and some mails of a thread missing
in one list - sounds annoying.

johannes