On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 05:21:14PM +0000, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
> [Good post snipped]
> I see what you are saying. I have previously spoken against doing this
> due to not wanting to leave new folks in a wasteland where the people
> who can answer questions have done elsewhere.
Agreed.
> It may now well be time to change this.
Also agreed.
> If we did, my preference would be to start a new list - maybe
> exim-experts - and encourage the esoteric traffic to go there.
I'm not sure whether this has advantage - the question is what defines
the esoteric traffic - bear in mind that often an apparently simple
question from a less-experienced user can cause all sorts of debate
(not to mention the appearance of Greg A Woods...).
> Theoretically exim-dev could take on this role, although its meant to
> have a different purpose, and I would prefer it to stay relatively low
> traffic and focused.
Please don't let's change the focus of exim-dev.
> exim-users has had a charter of being for all users and has been well
> advertised for 10 years. I would prefer not to make the first point of
> call be elsewhere.
I think, even despite what I've said above that this is the overriding
argument, to be honest.
> However I await other comments with interest.
I have to say that I would be much happier to answer RTFM-style questions
on a list where I knew that people were subscribing because they were
newer users, and if there was a place where deeper discussions could happen
without having to permanently repaste links to bits of the specification.
I can certainly see how the current exim-users is somewhat intimidating,
and were it not for me having been able to learn about MTAs and SMTP at
about the time it started getting complicated, I might have not joined it
or kept up with it now.
I don't like "exim-experts", but I don't know what else to suggest. Ideally
it should be roughly welcoming (the group shouldn't stagnate), but it should
discourage questions which are trivially answerable from the specification.
Hope this adds something to the discussion
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm@???> http://colondot.net/
(Please use this address to reply)
