On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 04:04:47PM +0000, tytso@xxxxxxx wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:02:47AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > > >> linux-fsdevel might seem as a good candidate for it, but still I > > >> think that it deserves a separate ML to point people to. > > I'm personally in favor of using linux-fsdevel since it might > encourage more fs developers who aren't using xfstests yet to start > using it. I'd prefer a separate mailing list - I don't really like the idea of burying general lists in large amounts of specific topic-related traffic. That way lies lkml - a dumping ground for everything that has no stopic-related lists and that results in a very low signal to noise ratio. Comparitively speaking, -fsdevel has a high SNR, so we should try to keep it that way. ;) That said, I can see the value in sending update/release announcements to -fsdevel, but I'd prefer to keep all the xfstests traffic separate. A separate list makes things like archive searching and patch tracking much simpler.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
