merge these lists?

merge these lists?

[Paul Mackerras]

A lot of messages seem to get cross-posted to both linuxppc-dev and
linuxppc64-dev these days, since we are all working in the one tree.
Rather than having to cross-post, I propose that we create a single
powerpc-dev@ozlabs.org list to replace linuxppc-dev and
linuxppc64-dev.  (The linuxppc-embedded list would continue as at
present.)

If we do this, we would set up the new list with the union of the
subscribers of the old lists, and make emails sent to linuxppc-dev and
linuxppc64-dev go to the new list, so it should be painless.

Thoughts? Comments? Objections?

Paul.

Re: merge these lists?

[Jeremy Kerr]

Paul,

> If we do this, we would set up the new list with the union of the
> subscribers of the old lists, and make emails sent to linuxppc-dev
> and linuxppc64-dev go to the new list, so it should be painless.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Objections?

How about the patchwork lists? Should I look at merging those too?


Jeremy

Re: merge these lists?

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 02:45:45PM +1100, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> Paul,
> 
> > If we do this, we would set up the new list with the union of the
> > subscribers of the old lists, and make emails sent to linuxppc-dev
> > and linuxppc64-dev go to the new list, so it should be painless.
> >
> > Thoughts? Comments? Objections?
> 
> How about the patchwork lists? Should I look at merging those too?

I get a feeling that our maintainers might not be using them much any
more (most patches since August of last year are still "New"), but I
find it convenient to search for a patch that you know has gone by but
can't find in your list mbox.

I would appreciate either a merge, or a new archive started for the new
list. It's useful.


-Olof

Re: merge these lists?

[Michael Ellerman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1291 bytes --]

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 15:12, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 02:45:45PM +1100, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> > Paul,
> >
> > > If we do this, we would set up the new list with the union of the
> > > subscribers of the old lists, and make emails sent to linuxppc-dev
> > > and linuxppc64-dev go to the new list, so it should be painless.
> > >
> > > Thoughts? Comments? Objections?
> >
> > How about the patchwork lists? Should I look at merging those too?
>
> I get a feeling that our maintainers might not be using them much any
> more (most patches since August of last year are still "New"), but I
> find it convenient to search for a patch that you know has gone by but
> can't find in your list mbox.
>
> I would appreciate either a merge, or a new archive started for the new
> list. It's useful.

And while Jk has nothing else to do .. I'd like to be able to managed my own 
patches, ie. set them as obsolete etc etc.

Oh and yeah I think we should merge the lists :D

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
IBM OzLabs

email: michael:ellerman.id.au
inmsg: mpe:jabber.org
wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: merge these lists?

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 02:41:39PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> A lot of messages seem to get cross-posted to both linuxppc-dev and
> linuxppc64-dev these days, since we are all working in the one tree.
> Rather than having to cross-post, I propose that we create a single
> powerpc-dev@ozlabs.org list to replace linuxppc-dev and
> linuxppc64-dev.  (The linuxppc-embedded list would continue as at
> present.)

Why not just kill linuxppc64-dev and leave linuxppc-dev?  Probably not
worth to remove the well-known and widely used address just for the
sake of it.

Re: merge these lists?

[Kumar Gala]

On Feb 7, 2006, at 4:56 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 02:41:39PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>> A lot of messages seem to get cross-posted to both linuxppc-dev and
>> linuxppc64-dev these days, since we are all working in the one tree.
>> Rather than having to cross-post, I propose that we create a single
>> powerpc-dev@ozlabs.org list to replace linuxppc-dev and
>> linuxppc64-dev.  (The linuxppc-embedded list would continue as at
>> present.)
>
> Why not just kill linuxppc64-dev and leave linuxppc-dev?  Probably not
> worth to remove the well-known and widely used address just for the
> sake of it.

I agree.  Let's just kill linuxppc64-dev and direct people at  
linuxppc-dev.

- kumar

Re: merge these lists?

[Kumar Gala]

On Feb 6, 2006, at 9:45 PM, Jeremy Kerr wrote:

> Paul,
>
>> If we do this, we would set up the new list with the union of the
>> subscribers of the old lists, and make emails sent to linuxppc-dev
>> and linuxppc64-dev go to the new list, so it should be painless.
>>
>> Thoughts? Comments? Objections?
>
> How about the patchwork lists? Should I look at merging those too?

Hmm, how about a merged patchwork starting after 2.6.16?

- kumar

Re: merge these lists?

[Linas Vepstas]

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 08:35:23AM -0600, Kumar Gala was heard to remark:
> 
> I agree.  Let's just kill linuxppc64-dev and direct people at  
> linuxppc-dev.

Can a sysadmin merge the subscription lists?
I didn't even know that there was a linuxppc-dev list; 
I thought the merge of these two lists occured a year ago,
when it was moved to ozlabs :-/

--linas

Re: merge these lists?

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 651 bytes --]

On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 10:43:05 -0600 linas@austin.ibm.com (Linas Vepstas) wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 08:35:23AM -0600, Kumar Gala was heard to remark:
> > 
> > I agree.  Let's just kill linuxppc64-dev and direct people at  
> > linuxppc-dev.
> 
> Can a sysadmin merge the subscription lists?

Yes, "a sysadmin" could do that.  However, those that are
subscribed with different addresses on each list will end
up subscribed twice and those who have changed their preferences on
the abondoned list will have fix them as well.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Membership stats (Was: Re: merge these lists?)

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 648 bytes --]

On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:01:50 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Yes, "a sysadmin" could do that.  However, those that are
> subscribed with different addresses on each list will end
> up subscribed twice and those who have changed their preferences on
> the abondoned list will have fix them as well.

Just for interest:

	members of linuxppc-dev		473
	members of linuxppc64-dev	264
	common				 98

But, as I said, "common" above does not count those who have different
addresses subscribed to each list.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Membership stats (Was: Re: merge these lists?)

[Kumar Gala]

On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:01:50 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, "a sysadmin" could do that.  However, those that are
> > subscribed with different addresses on each list will end
> > up subscribed twice and those who have changed their preferences on
> > the abondoned list will have fix them as well.
> 
> Just for interest:
> 
> 	members of linuxppc-dev		473
> 	members of linuxppc64-dev	264
> 	common				 98
> 
> But, as I said, "common" above does not count those who have different
> addresses subscribed to each list.

Where did we leave on with this?  I was about to request that 
marc.theaimsgroup.com start archiving some of the ppc lists but figured 
doing it after we merged lists would be better.

- kumar

Re: Membership stats (Was: Re: merge these lists?)

[Paul Mackerras]

Kumar Gala writes:

> Where did we leave on with this?  I was about to request that 
> marc.theaimsgroup.com start archiving some of the ppc lists but figured 
> doing it after we merged lists would be better.

My current thought is to call the combined list "linuxppc-dev" and put
the appropriate redirection in place from linuxppc64-dev to
linuxppc-dev.

If anyone really objects to that, shout now.

Paul.