I'm new to this, and maybe I'm looking in the wrong place, but I can't
see mingw-crosscompile or mingw-port listed on
http://www.mingw.org/lists.shtml. Neither are they options in the
"Archive Search" on the home page. Maybe that could explain why they
don't have many subscribers?
Keith MARSHALL wrote:
>Brian Dessent wrote, quoting me:
>>>Let's have a straw poll of opinion on continuing the practice of
>>>automated cross posting from the fora.
>>I agree that it's annoying to have to follow the URL to reply.
>>On the other hand, I would never waste my time with SF's awaful
>>"forums" and so if this were turned off I would just never see any
>>of those postings, and never reply. I suspect others might be in
>>the same boat. So, those posters would just lose out.
>I agree that it is not desirable to leave the forum users out in
>the cold, but...
>>I say that the occasional "accidental reply to the list" is still
>>better than the alternative which is requests for help going ignored.
>Yes, *if* the fora are allowed to remain active; however...
>>The best solution IMO would be to disable those awful sourceforge
>>forums and tell people to post to the list.
>...this is precisely the solution I had in mind. I would post one
>final message to each forum, advising users that the facility will
>no longer be supported, and that support will continue to be provided
>by subscription to the list only; I would then disable further posts
>to the fora.
>On the subject of mailing lists, I also believe that we have too many
>of them. I appreciate the intent in keeping discussion of sub-topics
>in separate archives, but in reality, the boundaries between the lists
>are not well defined, the subsidiary lists are poorly subscribed, and
>posts to most, beyond mingw-users and mingw-msys simply do not gain
>the exposure to the knowledge base of the main list subscribers;
>consequently, they often go unanswered.
>Here's a summary of the lists currently available, with notes on how
>I would propose to rationalise them:--
>Ostensibly for discussion of cross-compiling issues. Seems to have
>only six subscribers, and only one message archived. This list is
>effectively defunct. The subject matter has been openly discussed
>on mingw-users in the past; I propose that we continue to encourage
>the use of mingw-users for such discussion, and discontinue this
>little used list.
>Used for notification of commits to CVS, and therefore primarily of
>interest to MinGW developers. This list has a very specific purpose,
>which will be assiduously enforced; it should remain in service, to
>fulfil this purpose.
>This is a private list, for use by MinGW developers only. It should
>remain as the principal forum for discussion of development issues.
>Another private list, intended for use by the mingw.org maintainers.
>It seems to have fallen into disuse; I'm not convinced that we need
>to segregate this from mingw-dvlpr, but would welcome comment.
>One of the two principal public lists, probably needs no introduction.
>Could possibly be merged with mingw-users into a single list, since
>the distinction between mingw-msys and mingw-users issues isn't always
>clear cut; I'm quite ambivalent on this, and would welcome comment.
>Similar to mingw-cvs, but providing notification of package releases.
>This also has a clearly defined purpose, which will be assiduously
>enforced; it too should remain in service, to fulfil this purpose.
>A public list, to which the mingw-user community are invited to
>subscribe, for discussion of patches they intend to submit. It has
>its place, but could benefit from better exposure, say on the
>"SubmitPatches" page on the MinGWiki.
>Intended for public discussion of mingwPORT submissions and issues.
>IMO, it isn't adequately subscribed to fulfil its intended purpose,
>which could be better served by open discussion on mingw-users, with
>development details being further discussed on mingw-dvlpr; I vote
>to discontinue this one.
>Needs no introduction; if we were to keep only one list, this
>should be it! (This is not to suggest that we should be so brutal,
>in pruning the complement of mailing lists we provide).
>Do note that the above are my opinions only. I value the opinions
>of the MinGW Community at large, and will not implement any of the
>above without your approval.
>Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
>Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
>Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
>MinGW-users mailing list
>You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: