Ryan Davis wrote:
> 
> On Mar 2, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Mark Volkmann wrote:
> 
>> I'll admit to why I did this. It's probably the reason you would 
>> guess. I was perhaps being a little lazy. It's cumbersome to have to 
>> sign up for the mailing list of every Ruby library if you don't 
>> anticipate needing to use them very much. I just wanted to try out 
>> RubyInline. I was hoping that I could get a quick answer without 
>> having to signup for another mailing list, post there, wait for an 
>> answer, and unsubscribe. I thought I could sneak that through since 
>> there was an announcement about RubyInline on this list. I understand 
>> your concern though, so I'll sign up and ask my question on that list.
> 
> Filing a bug != subscribe to mailing list.
> 
> My whole point was that mailing lists are fleeting and not even remotely 
> guaranteed to be tracked over time. That is why we have bug dbs in the 
> first place.
> 

I guess my point is that people file bugs that aren't. Every now and 
then the ruby-core list gets a generated copy of a bug report saying 
something like "I don't like how feature X behaves", typically something 
answered in the FAQ and in ruby-talk archives. For example:

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/10066

At least in the case of ruby itself, it seems better to filter this kind 
of thing through ruby-talk before it escalates to bother the developers.

Also, I like to learn about other projects without having to subscribe 
to all their lists....

I do agree that in the case of real bugs, you want to find the reports 
in your db, rather than have to read every message on ruby-talk. So, I 
guess there's a tradeoff...

-- 
       vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407