From: Benny Halevy Subject: Merge {nfsv4,pnfs}@linux-nfs.org with linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org? Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 21:14:58 +0300 Message-ID: <4BD729A2.3000805@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" , NFS list To: pNFS Mailing List , nfsv4 Return-path: Received: from daytona.panasas.com ([67.152.220.89]:3011 "EHLO daytona.int.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754548Ab0D0SPH (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:15:07 -0400 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Forwarding to the linux-nfs.org lists. On Apr. 27, 2010, 21:10 +0300, "J. Bruce Fields" wrote: On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 07:44:51PM +0300, Benny Halevy wrote: > On Apr. 27, 2010, 19:34 +0300, "J. Bruce Fields" wrote: > > The main lists we've been using are: > > > > linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org > > nfsv4@linux-nfs.org > > pnfs@linux-nfs.org > > > > This seems to be confusing. We've talked before about transitioning > > away from one (probably nfsv4@linux-nfs.org). Maybe now's the time to > > start. > > I'm all for it. > Maybe it's time to fold the pnfs list into linux-nfs too. So, looking back at what we did for the sourceforge list: - We added something to the footer saying the list is deprecated. (But if we wanted to be more obnoxious, we could add it to the top of each message.) - We subscribed the new list (linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org) to the old list, I guess so newbie bug reports sent to the old list wouldn't get lost. Anyone want to object to starting that process for nfsv4@linux-nfs.org? What about pnfs@linux-nfs.org? --b.