On Sat, 2005-09-10 at 12:15 -0400, Scot L. Harris wrote:
More lists are not going to resolve the afore mentioned issue.
That's not entirely true. Yes, it won't solve the #1 complaint.
But the #2 complaint I've noted is hardware selection and good server design being discussed on the list, among other "good practices" (e.g., DNS, configuration management, etc...). Yes, it's not CentOS specific, but it's very CentOS relevant at the same time.
We could _really_ use a "practices" list where these things could be discussed. Things that are not CentOS-specific, but heavily impact day- to-day deployments of CentOS where the CentOS userbase could be tapped. Things where another list might not be privy to the specifics of CentOS, and it because a catch-22 of software-specific v. CentOS-specific.
More lists will lead to cross posting between the lists (just to make sure those that know something see your particular problem) and the threads that drift off topic and devolve to the point that no useful info is being exchanged will still occur. Just in more places and most likely with posts to several lists.
The key is people need to use a good method of "moving" to another list.
I use 2 techniques, sometimes both -- _neither_ is a direct cross-post.
One is to post directly to the other list, and CC _all_ the original participants. That way, their follow-up is to the other list, and not the original. It takes some time, but it's worth it.
The other is to just make a brief statement on the original list that "I am responding on (whatever list)" and state _nothing_ else. Don't even quote anyone, which leaves no room for anyone to read something double- quoted and response. People just need to do this and it typically addresses it within 2-3 more follow-ups.
So while I agree with you that more lists only introduce cross-posting, we really _could_ use a "[best] practices" list. Again, it would address the catch-22 of going to a software-specific list, but losing the CentOS-specific user-base/knowledge-share.