From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id oABG2TLE059992 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:02:29 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfsprogs: update deb package maintainer, bump version From: Alex Elder In-Reply-To: <120112634.29711289446960016.JavaMail.root@acxmail-au2.aconex.com> References: <120112634.29711289446960016.JavaMail.root@acxmail-au2.aconex.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:03:26 -0600 Message-ID: <1289491406.2280.7.camel@doink> Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: aelder@sgi.com List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Nathan Scott Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Anibal@oss.sgi.com, Monsalve Salazar , xfs On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 14:42 +1100, Nathan Scott wrote: > ----- "Alex Elder" wrote: . . . > > I'm not sure where you sent these patches the first time > > but I seem to have missed them. In the future please > > send this sort of thing to the list for review. > > They went to the list (thats where hch found 'em), perhaps > caught in a spam trap at your end or something like that? OK, I think I found the problem. You are sending to "linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com" and I'm not on that list. I wasn't even aware of it. Something in majordomo still shows Jim Mostek as having some sort of ownership for that list (which would be at least 10 year old information). I'd prefer everyone uses "xfs@oss.sgi.com", which seems to be what most resources I found use as *the* XFS mailing list. Discussion about this is welcome, but I think it's best to not have multiple lists for the same purpose. -Alex _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs