From: | Jimmy Kaplowitz <jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | board(at)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-board(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Jimmy Kaplowitz <treasurer(at)spi-inc(dot)org>, secretary(at)spi-inc(dot)org, spi-private(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [Spi-private] private vs. general: Openness of Board Discussions |
Date: | 2007-02-15 18:07:31 |
Message-ID: | 20070215180731.GJ28237@mail.kaplowitz.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
Thread: | |
Lists: | spi-general |
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 09:44:45AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> What I'm contending is that right now, today, we have dozens of contributing
> members who are receiving mail from -private but not from -general. If all
> contributing members need to pay attention to -general, we need to notify
> them to resubscribe on -private *first*.
Notification sent and received via -private. I also pointed them to the
online -general web archives in case they want to see what they have
missed so far. The archives will also be useful in that, if we move
fully public discussions to -general now, they can be informed of what
we say between now and when they resubscribe to general.
Now can we please remove -private and stop giving me *3* copies (direct,
-general, -private) of every email in this thread in my inbox, plus a
*4th* copy in my -board mailbox? (I am setting the Mail-Followup-To
header properly in my mails, so your client shouldn't be sending me a
direct response, but apparently it is. Even if you can't get the total
number of copies down to 2, having only 2 in my inbox plus 1 in my board
box would still be an improvement. You can also feel free to remove
"Jimmy Kaplowitz <treasurer(at)spi-inc(dot)org>" from the list; I put that in
out of habit in one of my mails, and it seems to be persisting.)
And, I did reply to your substantive objections to the resolution as
well. Your thoughts on my reply would also be welcome (on -general
please, optionally but not necessarily plus -board).
- Jimmy Kaplowitz
jimmy(at)spi-inc(dot)org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | MJ Ray | 2007-02-16 14:00:52 | Re: SPI's respect for debian resolutions, was: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads |
Previous Message | Petter Reinholdtsen | 2007-02-15 17:57:03 | Re: [Spi-private] private vs. general: Openness of Board Discussions |