Re: List traffic

On Thu, 27 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:

> Sure, if we have distinctions which make sense then having separate
> lists makes sense. Linux has separate lists for different drivers,
> different parts of the kernel, projects to improve the kernel in
> various specific ways (latency, etc). I'm all for having a list
> dedicated to infrastructure (oddly named -www here)

Actually, infrastructure is appropriately discussed on -sysadmins ... web
is on -www ... tends to be a bit of overlap since -sysadmins was added
later, and prior to that we did discuss on -www ...

> since those topics are usually well defined. Lists like -ecpg or -odbc
> would work fine if the traffic warranted them.

I don't agree with the comment about 'if traffic warranted them' though
... the fact that there is very little traffic should be what makes them
attractive / useful ... you don't have to weed through alot of posts to
find the odbc/ecpg related ones ...

> Perhaps what I'm looking for is a more sensible division that allows
> most of the traffic related to the subtopics to actually go there. It
> would have to be a division so clearcut that anyone who doesn't follow
> could reasonably be blamed for not following etiquette. That's simply
> not true with the current divisions.

how about something -sql vs -tuning ... ? -tuning replacing -performance,
which I do agree could be sql *or* server ... where -tuning would be more
obviously server related ...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy(at)hub(dot)org http://www.hub.org

Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy(at)hub(dot)org