From: "Sean Chittenden" <sean / chittenden.org>


> > [James:]
> > I believe there is already a question of whether such lists should
> > be hosted by ruby-lang.org.  I would suggest that broad-topic lists
> > remain under the auspices of the ruby-lang.org umbrella, while
> > independent lists be reserved for application-specific topics (e.g.,
> > the DRuby or REXML lists).
>
> Having the lists, regardless of where they are, is more important than
> not having the lists.  Transfering the domains/lists/subscribers is
> easy, building the communties and diversifying the traffic is what's
> important.  Getting the proof of concenpt done is important since
> there seems to be some doubt as to its need.  -sc
>
> --
> Sean Chittenden

You are correct, but heed the warning of community fragmentation caused by
disorganised lists.  I know you want to "organise" the lists, but if you do it
in haste, as a proof-of-concept-that-becomes-production, then they will in fact
be disorganised.

My kind of organisation:
 - all lists under same umbrella (logical; surely bandwidth can be
   appropriated without changing names?)
 - single web page to manage all subscriptions
 - consistent archive/search interface

I personally would like to see many (15? 20?) lists as described in other
posts, subscribe to them all, have them go to separate folders, and then manage
the subscriptions to prevent email overflow.

Being able to do this would achieve a great deal of organisation while
maintaining the stength of community.

Your points about deregulation etc. are well made, but we are talking about a
community here, not a set of competing profit-making organisations.  A little
planning (and only a little) will serve us well.

Gavin