Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 15:30:40 -0600 From: Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> To: "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net> Cc: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>, Murray Stokely <murray@freebsdmall.com>, Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: new FreeBSD mailing list Message-ID: <3C853900.D0814685@centtech.com> References: <3C7AFCED.ADDE60EE@centtech.com> <20020226093250.A1369@canyon.nothing-going-on.org> <3C7BEF25.C1EEB8AD@centtech.com> <20020304215226.GG3250@freebsdmall.com> <p05101504b8aa468a2ac4@[10.0.1.3]> <3C84C9EE.71635BF8@centtech.com> <tmadtmhfdh.dtm@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hackers is usually very busy with code pieces, and fixes, along with general software and code hacks to fix things. I think the tuning/performance stuff along with documentation things will get lost in the shuffle.. Eric "Gary W. Swearingen" wrote: > > Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> writes: > > > That's pretty much my goal. I'd like to discuss with others who are using > > FreeBSD in different contexts, and gather the pertinent tuning information. > > Having it in the Handbook is fantastic, but individually we are not able to see > > all areas of tuning, or even all the effects of some tuning. I would hate to > > tune my FreeBSD box for NFS serving, and have it hose the http servicing (for > > example), and publish it. Kind of a "peer review" effect. > > That all makes sense, but I wonder if you could get much of the same > benefit and a larger readership (important, methinks) if there was a ML > for "the discussion of documentation improvements" which could have > long-lived "tuning" (and other) threads. I've seen a need for such ML > when -doc didn't seem the place and the other MLs were either too > unfamiliar to me or too-little read or seemingly inappropriate. This > could reduce the amount of errors introduced by the two or three > (usually non-specialist) people involved with a PR but not caught by > lurking specialists. I have previously feared that such a list would > have a too-small readership, but now I don't see why it should be any > smaller than -perf or such; i.e., not too small to be worth a try. I > would hope that it would draw a lot of "do-gooders" that are otherwise > not willing to get involved in particular PRs. Another time killer. > > In lieu of either your or my suggested ML, -hackers seems the best ML > for you and me (though I've not yet tried posting there, so I could be > very wrong). Is -hackers good enough? Is it even OK? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Systems Administrator Centaur Technology If at first you don't succeed, sky diving is probably not for you. ------------------------------------------------------------------ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C853900.D0814685>