xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfsprogs: update deb package maintainer, bump version

To: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfsprogs: update deb package maintainer, bump version
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:05:23 -0500
Cc: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Anibal Monsalve Salazar <anibal@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1289491406.2280.7.camel@doink>
References: <120112634.29711289446960016.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1289491406.2280.7.camel@doink>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:03:26AM -0600, Alex Elder wrote:
> OK, I think I found the problem.  You are sending to
> "linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" and I'm not on that list.
> I wasn't even aware of it.  Something in majordomo
> still shows Jim Mostek as having some sort of
> ownership for that list (which would be at least 10
> year old information).
> 
> I'd prefer everyone uses "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx", which seems
> to be what most resources I found use as *the* XFS mailing
> list.  Discussion about this is welcome, but I think
> it's best to not have multiple lists for the same purpose.

Yes, we should have just one list.  My preference would be
linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx as vger doesn't have the various issues
of the SGI mail setup, but the important bit is to concentrate on one.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>