From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Henningsson Subject: Re: alsa-asoc-devel? Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2010 13:06:58 +0200 Message-ID: <4C5BECD2.4050208@canonical.com> References: <4C5BC9E9.2000407@canonical.com> <1281091726.3077.6.camel@odin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from adelie.canonical.com (adelie.canonical.com [91.189.90.139]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC194103998 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 13:07:01 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <1281091726.3077.6.camel@odin> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Liam Girdwood Cc: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org 2010-08-06 12:48, Liam Girdwood skrev: > On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 10:38 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> There is a lot of asoc traffic on this list, and I assume many people >> following this list are not interested in ASoC patches. >> >> Have you considered splitting the alsa-devel mailing list into an >> alsa-asoc-devel mailing list, for ASoC specific stuff, and alsa-devel >> for everything else? > > IMO, I think it's pretty much fine where it is atm. It's easy enough to > filter the posts between ASoC, HDA, OSS etc if you are interested in a > particular area. Moving the list would also mean core ALSA changes may > not be fully discussed by ASoC developers/users etc. I'm not saying ASoC developers and users should stop subscribing to alsa-devel, if they want to know about core ALSA changes. Also, filtering is easy enough for local mailboxes, but not for people following the list via gmane.org, or when looking through alsa-devel's archives. Let's hear if more people has something to say about this proposal. If I'm the only one thinking that a split would be good, obviously it should stay the way it is :-) -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. http://launchpad.net/~diwic