Is there really a reason to keep a separate NFSv4 mailing list? v4
support is part of the same nfs/nfsd modules and quite deeply
interwinded with the v2/v3 code. It seems most posts to the NFSv4 list
get cross-posted to the regular nfs list anyway.
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 13:49 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Is there really a reason to keep a separate NFSv4 mailing list? v4
> support is part of the same nfs/nfsd modules and quite deeply
> interwinded with the v2/v3 code. It seems most posts to the NFSv4 list
> get cross-posted to the regular nfs list anyway.
I certainly agree that we can start deprecating the [email protected]
list, but I'm reluctant to shut it down completely as long as we're
seeing some non-cross posted traffic there.
How about if we keep it open for another 6 months, and use that time to
educate those people who post only on [email protected] to move on to
linux-nfs?
Cheers
Trond
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 02:07:04PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 13:49 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Is there really a reason to keep a separate NFSv4 mailing list? v4
> > support is part of the same nfs/nfsd modules and quite deeply
> > interwinded with the v2/v3 code. It seems most posts to the NFSv4 list
> > get cross-posted to the regular nfs list anyway.
>
> I certainly agree that we can start deprecating the [email protected]
> list, but I'm reluctant to shut it down completely as long as we're
> seeing some non-cross posted traffic there.
>
> How about if we keep it open for another 6 months, and use that time to
> educate those people who post only on [email protected] to move on to
> linux-nfs?
How about just turning the nfsv4 list into an auto-responder telling
people to use the [email protected]?
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 02:14:50PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 02:07:04PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 13:49 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Is there really a reason to keep a separate NFSv4 mailing list? v4
> > > support is part of the same nfs/nfsd modules and quite deeply
> > > interwinded with the v2/v3 code. It seems most posts to the NFSv4 list
> > > get cross-posted to the regular nfs list anyway.
> >
> > I certainly agree that we can start deprecating the [email protected]
> > list, but I'm reluctant to shut it down completely as long as we're
> > seeing some non-cross posted traffic there.
> >
> > How about if we keep it open for another 6 months, and use that time to
> > educate those people who post only on [email protected] to move on to
> > linux-nfs?
>
> How about just turning the nfsv4 list into an auto-responder telling
> people to use the [email protected]?
Either's fine with me.
--b.
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 14:14 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 02:07:04PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 13:49 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Is there really a reason to keep a separate NFSv4 mailing list? v4
> > > support is part of the same nfs/nfsd modules and quite deeply
> > > interwinded with the v2/v3 code. It seems most posts to the NFSv4 list
> > > get cross-posted to the regular nfs list anyway.
> >
> > I certainly agree that we can start deprecating the [email protected]
> > list, but I'm reluctant to shut it down completely as long as we're
> > seeing some non-cross posted traffic there.
> >
> > How about if we keep it open for another 6 months, and use that time to
> > educate those people who post only on [email protected] to move on to
> > linux-nfs?
>
> How about just turning the nfsv4 list into an auto-responder telling
> people to use the [email protected]?
>
I tend to be wary of auto-responders: more often than not, they turn out
to be great vehicles for relaying spam.
However if someone with more mail administrator experience than myself
would volunteer to help set one up, then I'd be willing to give it a
try.
Cheers
Trond