[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140514213529.GT26353@dastard>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 07:35:29 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: tytso@....edu
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
dchinner@...hat.com, xfs@....sgi.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Separate mailing list for xfstests
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 04:04:47PM +0000, tytso@....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@...morbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists