On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 13:43:06 +0100, Christian Iseli wrote: > On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 13:02:25 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Effectively, there is no way > > to address *all* maintainers and no way either to address all Extras > > maintainers, because fedora-extras-list is avoided like the plague by > > [probably many] Extras packagers due to past review-traffic madness. > > I do not know on what evidence you base your assertion that f-e-l is > "avoided like the plague", It's the experience I've made by talking to multiple packagers in private mail after pointing them to a message in the list archives. [As might be known, a few of us do reply to fedora-extras-commits diffs occasionally and then find out that the packagers don't see the messages sent to fedora-extras-list (and, btw, are not subscribed to fedora-extras-commits list either).] Maybe it changes slowly and they come back after the bugzilla "spam" has been moved to a separate list. But since even the number of build reports and problem reports (repoclosure, upgradepaths) has been criticised, that is evidence that there are more packagers who are not interested in general content on fedora-extras-list. _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
