On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 8:18 AM Sage Weil <sweil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > We are splitting the ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx list into two: > > - dev@xxxxxxx > > This will be the new general purpose Ceph development discussion list. > We encourage all subscribers to the current ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > to subscribe to this new list. > > Subscribe to the new ceph-devel list now at: > > https://lists.ceph.io/postorius/lists/dev.ceph.io/ After registration, email is not being sent(checked all folders too), Anyone else seeing this? > > (We were originally going to call this list ceph-devel@xxxxxxx, but are > going with dev@xxxxxxx instead to avoid the confusion of having two > 'ceph-devel's, particularly when searching archives.) > > - ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > The current list will continue to exist, but its role will shift to > Linux kernel-related traffic, including kernel patches and discussion of > implementation details for the kernel client code. > > At some point in the future, when all non-kernel discussion has shifted > to the new list, you might want to unsubscribe from the old list. > > For the next week or two, please direct discussion at both lists. Once a > bit of time has passed and most active developers have subscribed to the > new list, we will focus discussion on the new list only. > > We will send several more emails to the old list to remind people to > subscribe to the new list. > > Why are we doing this? > > 1 The new list is mailman and managed by the Ceph community, which means > that when people have problems with subscribe, mails being lost, or any > other list-related problems, we can actually do something about it. > Currently we have no real ability to perform any management-related tasks > on the vger list. > > 2 The vger majordomo setup also has some frustrating features/limitations, > the most notable being that it only accepts plaintext email; anything > with MIME or HTML formatting is rejected. This confuses many users. > > 3 The kernel development and general Ceph development have slightly > different modes of collaboration. Kernel code review is based on email > patches to the list and reviewing via email, which can be noisy and > verbose for those not involved in kernel development. The Ceph userspace > code is handled via github pull requests, which capture both proposed > changes and code review. > > Thanks!
