Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 20:51:05 +0100 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: peter.lai@uconn.edu Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Administrivia: Discussion - Making this list subscriber-only Message-ID: <200208281951.g7SJp5l5033179@grimreaper.grondar.org> In-Reply-To: <20020828190232.GA533@cowbert.2y.net> ; from "Peter C. Lai" <sirmoo@cowbert.2y.net> "Wed, 28 Aug 2002 15:02:32 EDT." References: <20020828190232.GA533@cowbert.2y.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> A better comparison would be freebsd-stable. Every and any problem > that people have they will send there as long as uname -r says > xxx-STABLE. This includes things like 'i can't do foo anymore after > upgrading' to debugging of a kernel. The SNR of that list is much > lower than here. Some questions typically get drowned out > by other ones that people on this list would deem off-topic. > I don't see discussions there about appropriate content either. > If you are lamenting about SNR, propose to make this list > technical and not general. Furthermore, you can also set an example > by not group-replying to mail you think is off-topic. It all > comes down to the mentality of the subscribers. If people here > habitually digress, then that is the nature of this list. Very nicely put! HOWEVER, this list is _supposed_ to be technical and not general already. My efforts are now aimed towards enforcing this. > There is a "charter" but all it says is: > "FREEBSD-SECURITY > Security issues > > FreeBSD computer security issues (DES, Kerberos, known security > holes and fixes, etc). This is a technical mailing list for which > strictly technical content is expected." Once we conclude this discussion, I will fix this :-) > Well, at least it says that chatter is discouraged (such as complaining > about spam) but it doesn't limit what 'technical' questions are being asked. > "I can't implement foo in IPSEC. Has someone done 'foo' with IPSEC before, > and how?" seems to be a legitimate technical question to me. Point taken. When the time comes, I will propose a replacement for the above charter and see what you folks think. > Yes, telling people to RTFM where there is no FM to read is silly > (or if you need to be Jordan Hubbard to understand it). Quite. Remember that FreeBSD is a community project; this is folks' chance to contribute! With a bit of leadership (which I am attempting to provide), useful FMs for folks to read should be available. :-) M -- o Mark Murray \_ O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200208281951.g7SJp5l5033179>