Re: Separate mailing list for xfstests

Dave Chinner
2014-05-14T21:35:48Z

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 04:04:47PM +0000, tytso@mit.edu wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:02:47AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > >> linux-fsdevel might seem as a good candidate for it, but still I
> > >> think that it deserves a separate ML to point people to.
>
> I'm personally in favor of using linux-fsdevel since it might
> encourage more fs developers who aren't using xfstests yet to start
> using it.

I'd prefer a separate mailing list - I don't really like the idea of
burying general lists in large amounts of specific topic-related
traffic. That way lies lkml - a dumping ground for everything that
has no stopic-related lists and that results in a very low signal to
noise ratio. Comparitively speaking, -fsdevel has a high SNR, so we
should try to keep it that way. ;)

That said, I can see the value in sending update/release
announcements to -fsdevel, but I'd prefer to keep all the xfstests
traffic separate. A separate list makes things like archive
searching and patch tracking much simpler....

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com