From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0196BC0A for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:19:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from server2.thinkcrime.de (server2.thinkcrime.de [213.133.110.149]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l2C9J5Es012149 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:19:05 +0100 Received: from hod-sarge-2005-10.lan.m-e-leypold.de (dslb-088-072-207-076.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.72.207.76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by server2.thinkcrime.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0784D488176 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:19:04 +0100 (CET) Received: by hod-sarge-2005-10.lan.m-e-leypold.de (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 767F8376C2; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:25:22 +0100 (CET) To: OCaml Mailing List Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml-developer mailing-list: subscribe now! References: <78295CB6-B05B-4AF1-9AD5-AE7A8E7B42FA@epfl.ch> Organization: Leypold, Software-Dienstleistungen und -Beratung From: ls-ocaml-developer-2006@m-e-leypold.de Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:25:22 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Martin Jambon's message of "Sun, 11 Mar 2007 19:21:48 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: <4xbqiyoltp.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 45F51B09.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ens-lyon:01 ens-lyon:01 skipping:01 markus:01 2007,:98 2007,:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 imho:01 caml-list:01 caml-list:01 writes:01 writes:01 jambon:01 jambon:01 Martin Jambon writes: > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, ls-ocaml-developer-2006@m-e-leypold.de wrote: > >> Martin Jambon writes: >> >>> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007, ls-ocaml-developer-2006@m-e-leypold.de wrote: >>> >>>>> 2) Skipping all the unnecessary "language geekiness" stuff >>>> >>>> And that cannot be done by hand so that we have to split the community? >>> >>> Having to do things by hand is never really a good sign. >> >> Really? But how will the relevant mail be distributed to the >> relevant lists? Aren't we deciding by hand to which list the mail goes >> and isn't this prone to errors (i.e. "language geekiness" turning up >> at your list and pedestrian mail turning up at caml-list)? And if the >> splitting of mail by topics ("by hand") doesn't work well enough, >> we'll all have to subscribe to two lists. How annoying. > > There are 1000 readers per message but only one author. To me it seems > fair that the author of a message spends approximately 1000 times more > effort than it takes to read and delete the message. This is all nice and very moral, but: According to which criteria has the writer to select the list? No language geekiness at your list, that much is clear :-], but he/she can as well post almost anything to caml-list according to the charter of caml-list. This doesn't bode well for a distinctive sorting ... >> And fragmentation hurts especially the newcomers who will often only >> find and search one archive/list and then go away disapppointed (or >> enraged). > > People search the whole web with their favorite search engine, don't they? More Googleization at work. I dislike it. The internet is not only the web. Which brings me to another point against Google groups: There is no downloadable archive of messages (say in mbox format) which one can download and index/search locally by the program of ones choice. Basically all messages (as a whole) are locked into Google for the rest of time and every time one wants to find anything, one also furthers Googles business. At the long run a dear price to pay for a "free service". >> And: Will the CAML weekly news editor also read you list? > > I am not asking that from him, but yes he kindly proposed to do > so. Thanks again Alan! Good. IMHO that rather upgrades the status of the new list. Regards -- Markus