linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add "L: linux-arm@...r.kernel.org" to ARM sections

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090812220029.GA1387@ucw.cz>
Date:	Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:00:30 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
	David John <davidjon@...ontk.org>,
	Erik Mouw <mouw@...linux.org>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add "L: linux-arm@...r.kernel.org" to ARM
	sections

Hi!

> > > I haven't noticed a great rush of support for Joe's patch, which
> > > could mean that people here really aren't that bothered - maybe
> > > they just aren't "open list" zealots like some people seem to be.
> > 
> > I for one support open lists because subscriber-only lists are a PITA
> 
> Let me make this clear, yet again.  The lists are *not* subscriber only
> lists.  We do NOT reject non-subscriber posts for no reason what so ever
> (although it does seem to have happened, both Erik and myself both
> contend that we have never rejected a mailing intentionally without
> giving a reason - whether the original poster receives that reason is
> a function of how buggy mailman is.)

FAQ still states that cc-ing between l-k and lakml is
unwelcome. Reason why people prefer open lists is that you can cc both
l-k and the other relevant list.

> Moreover, vger is trying to replicate the setup we had back in the
> early 90s, which was found to be sub-optimal - we split the lists
> into kernel stuff, userspace stuff and toolchain stuff to reduce the
> amount of ignored postings - so that people specialising in ARM
> userspace didn't have to wade through all the (vastly more) kernel
> discussions.  Unfortunately, the new setup at vger would mean re-
> combining the lists.  Maybe that's another factor that people don't
> like?  Don't know.

I'd say that linux-arm@...r._kernel_.org is meant for kernel
discussion, so no, it is not trying to mix kernel&userspace.

> I have a theory.  People only complain about moderated mailing lists
> because they get messages telling them that their message has been
> caught.  If moderated mailing lists didn't send back that message,
> (and the queue was processed in a timely manner) people would not
> complain one bit.  So it is probably far better if I bend mailman
> such that it doesn't send out moderation messages - certainly to
> anyone called Pavel. ;)

Yes, those messages are indeed annoying.

If you can indeed process queue in timely manner, and remove FAQ entry
about not cc-ing between open lists and lakml, then yes, that would
probably be good-enough emulation of open list.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/