* moving the BitBucket GPL discussion to a context with potential for _progress_
@ 2003-03-16 4:06 Tom Lord
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Tom Lord @ 2003-03-16 4:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: arch-users, dev, opencm-dev, jmacd
[PLEASE ... DO NOT followup without trimming the addressees.]
David Lang (on lkml, in the context of a partly interesing
revision control system discussion):
hey guys, the suggestion to move to another list for this
discussion was to reduce traffic on the kernel list, not add a
bunch of arch discussions to the bitkeeper discussions.
First, please tolerate _some_ (hopefully very _short_ term)
cross-posting as a tactic to move the discussion to the
arch-users@lists.fifthvision.net list. Honestly, I think a few
redundant declarations on lkml can help with the medium-to-longer-term
movement of traffic off of lkml. (Not that your plea is inconsistent
with that.)
Second, I personally (taking a risk here) think it's reasonable to use
arch-users for more than just the narrow arch topic -- for the whole
lkml-vs.-bk issue, for example. arch-users are already learning from
these lkml threads. If you're *really* off-topic on arch-users, but
have made what you think is an enriching post, just put "OT:" in the
subject line (but, hey, make it a _high quality_ post, whatever that
means).
Third, in the arch world, I think we're really open-minded and
interested about revision control in general -- we're thinking a lot
about design issues -- not slavishly devoted to just a narrow
conception of arch. Projects that compete with arch -- developers of
competing systems -- let's (M. Grubb, forgive me for not getting prior
permission :-), gather on arch-users for rational discourse.
I'll leave you with the enclosed, from arch-users. We _are_ conscious
of de-noisifying lkml (and not needlessly noisifying any other list or
mbox).
-t
Subject: [arch-users] the "zen" of lkml
Here, let me try to say nothing at all:
*) On the one hand, if several of us say essentially the same
thing on lkml, but in different terms, that greatly increases
the chances of achieving communication.
*) On the other hand, if several of us say essentially the same
thing on lkml, but in different terms, that greatly increases
the chances of dragging out an unwelcome thread.
I don't know what that means but it sounds important so keep it in
mind.
-t
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@lists.fifthvision.net
http://lists.fifthvision.net/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2003-03-16 3:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-03-16 4:06 moving the BitBucket GPL discussion to a context with potential for _progress_ Tom Lord
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox