Christopher Stone wrote:
On 3/20/07, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Warren Togami schrieb:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThorstenLeemhuis/MailingListReorganization
>> But I think it doesn't make to much sense to discuss that now --
I'd say
>> we should discuss this again in detail when we are getting closer to
>> actually realizing it (e.g. maybe four weeks from now; or after F7
is out).
> I agree it is not a high priority to discuss this now, but please do
not
> assume there is widespread agreement to make these changes happen.
> I believe this has been a case where silence != agreement.
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-December/msg00104.html
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-December/msg00230.html
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-January/msg00104.html
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-January/msg00732.html
That are probably about 100 mails about the topic. And, as I wrote, I
even got a "Looks very sane to me."
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-January/msg00735.html
-- I marked that day in my calendar ;-)
But seems your don't like the plan that got worked out so far. That's
fine. Feel free to work out something else.
I can speak on the behalf of the games SIG and hereby declare that the
fedora-games-list should stay. Please take all references of
fedora-games-list off your mailing list reorg doc.
Why does games SIG require a separate mailing list?
Rahul
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
