Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 14:31:05 +0100 From: Paul Robinson <paul@iconoplex.co.uk> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: postmaster@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Removing the freebsd-config list Message-ID: <1080826265.406c19999b128@mail.servitor.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20040401132026.GA69240@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20040401061016.GA62958@xor.obsecurity.org> <1080824677.406c1365cfd14@mail.servitor.co.uk> <20040401132026.GA69240@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>: > Yes, because people are mistakenly asking support questions that are > going unanswered. I could be a pedant and point out that happens in questions@ as well. :-) > > What is the gain in it's removal? > > They'll hopefully keep looking at the list of mailing lists and figure > out that questions@ is where they should send it. Perhaps we just need a better description of the list and make it clearer where support queries go. We should not be deleting a list we know we probably need, but instead be re-asserting its true purpose. > That's what the list is ostensibly for, but the users are seeing > "freebsd-config" and thinking something different. If there's still > interest in the subject, the mailing list should at least be renamed > to something more obviously not about technical support :) I can't think of a better name. I tell you what, I'll start answering support queries with a boilerplate "go to -questions@" response, let's give it a couple of months and see where it goes. If it's still not being used for the discussion of configuration management, I see no harm in it being removed. I think the problem here, is the list has morphed and as it's low-traffic, most of us hadn't noticed. How does that sound? -- Paul Robinson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1080826265.406c19999b128>