Proposal: Automate fedora-maintainers subscriptions

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 21:57 +0100, Denis Leroy wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Christopher Stone wrote:
> >> On 3/20/07, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >>> Why does games SIG require a separate mailing list?
> >>
> >> For the same reason any SIG should have their own list.
> > 
> > That is not a good reason consider no SIG except games has its own 
> > mailing list.
> > 
> > If it is packaging details it should be in fedora-packaging list. Other 
> > details could be in fedora-devel list. In other words what do you 
> > discuss in fedora-games list that doesnt fit into any existing other 
> > Fedora lists?
> 
> To me the Games SIG is a fantastic example of a "SIG done right": a very 
> dynamic and active group that essentially created their own 
> sub-community. The smaller size makes it easier to define games-specific 
> packaging standard, contributes to faster package reviews, and so on. I 
> don't know about "should", but it seems to me if SIG members feel they 
> need their own list, why not.
> 
+1.

A follow-on question: does the list help strengthen the feeling of
community for the SIG members?  It's not all about technical questions
and answers, after all.  Having a camaraderie with fellow packagers is
also a worthwhile goal.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070320/1a4bf929/attachment.sig>