-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 It would appear that on May 18, M. Fioretti did say: > On Tue, May 18, 2004 09:09:54 AM -0600, Eric Diamond (eric@xxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > A new FC2 list would force many fedora-list denizens to choose where > > they can most constructively make use of their time. This would not > > be good for the fedora community. > > My goodness. Think of all those people who would still like to help > FC1 users but, having upgraded to FC2, are now forbidden by law to do > so. Would it really be *so* different by having only one list, with *more* > traffic, and most FC2 users skipping like crazy FC1 messages, because > they haven't time/interest/possibility to replicate bugs? But since this is a USER list, not a bug report, who says one *has* to replicate the reported problem to lend a little knowledge to a user with less expertise than your self? One thing that would be different by still only having one list that doesn't get supplanted every time a new core is released, rather than a separate list for each core release, would be that with one unchanging list the users who are trying to stay current won't have to keep modifying there list subscriptions and e-mail filters every 6 months. While I for one don't like "in subject" tags '[FCx]', at the *beginning* of the subject line, It would be nice if most users could be convinced to do something consistent that would help those who must, filter out the ones relating to the cores they don't have any interest in. - -- | --- --- | Joe (theWordy) Philbrook (-) (-) | J(tWdy)P ^ << Yawn >> | <<jtwdyp@xxxxxxxx>> /---\ | \___/ It must be past my bedtime... Good night all! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAqw7fRZ/61mwhY94RAg6DAJ9b2/E9G43GZS8azLf+AoWVp9kwPwCgwmZH NQgM7a5qoLso9shRct3Z/Kw= =5T5E -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
