proposal: mailing list reorganization

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Nicolas Mailhot schrieb:
> Le Jeu 11 janvier 2007 15:42, Thorsten Leemhuis a écrit :
>> Nicolas Mailhot schrieb:
>>> Le mercredi 10 janvier 2007 à 13:48 -0600, Josh Boyer a écrit :
>>>> On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 20:46 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>>>>> Le jeudi 11 janvier 2007 à 00:52 +0530, Rahul Sundaram a écrit :
>>>>>> Its even mentioned clearly in the wiki link that Thorsten posted. Do
>>>>>> read it completely first.
>>>>> Not to this level of detail.
>>>>> And I care about this level of detail, because that's where we have
>>>>> subtle variations right now.
>>>> You realize that it'll break any existing filters if we go off renaming
>>>> things right?
>>> The other renamings will break filters anyway. There's only one thing
>>> worse than incompatible changes — halfway-incompatible changes.
>> Well, there are so many lists with "-list" postfix. Renaming all of them
>> just for the sake of being consistent with all those others that don't
>> have a "list" postfix is IMHO not worth the trouble for the users.
> It is worth the trouble.

Do others agree with that? (Send me private yes/no if you don't want to
spam the list with "mee, too"-mails !)

> And I write it as someone with more -list than
> non-list subscriptions, who will have a merry time during the change. I'll
> gladly sacrifice my setup to the consistency altar.
>
> If you want to go the "minimum changes" route I'll insist to have all
> lists grow a -list postfix, non-postfixed lists are the oddball here ;)

I don't care much about to -list or not to -list, but having it
consistent might be good. I'm taking opinions on that, too (in private
or on the list).


CU
thl