Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      05 Mar 2002 13:30:18 -0800
From:      swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen)
To:        anderson@centtech.com
Cc:        Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>, Murray Stokely <murray@freebsdmall.com>, Nik Clayton <nik@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: new FreeBSD mailing list
Message-ID:  <tmadtmhfdh.dtm@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <3C84C9EE.71635BF8@centtech.com>
References:  <3C7AFCED.ADDE60EE@centtech.com> <20020226093250.A1369@canyon.nothing-going-on.org> <3C7BEF25.C1EEB8AD@centtech.com> <20020304215226.GG3250@freebsdmall.com> <p05101504b8aa468a2ac4@[10.0.1.3]> <3C84C9EE.71635BF8@centtech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> writes:

> That's pretty much my goal.  I'd like to discuss with others who are using
> FreeBSD in different contexts, and gather the pertinent tuning information. 
> Having it in the Handbook is fantastic, but individually we are not able to see
> all areas of tuning, or even all the effects of some tuning.  I would hate to
> tune my FreeBSD box for NFS serving, and have it hose the http servicing (for
> example), and publish it.  Kind of a "peer review" effect.  

That all makes sense, but I wonder if you could get much of the same
benefit and a larger readership (important, methinks) if there was a ML
for "the discussion of documentation improvements" which could have
long-lived "tuning" (and other) threads.  I've seen a need for such ML
when -doc didn't seem the place and the other MLs were either too
unfamiliar to me or too-little read or seemingly inappropriate.  This
could reduce the amount of errors introduced by the two or three
(usually non-specialist) people involved with a PR but not caught by
lurking specialists.  I have previously feared that such a list would
have a too-small readership, but now I don't see why it should be any
smaller than -perf or such; i.e., not too small to be worth a try.  I
would hope that it would draw a lot of "do-gooders" that are otherwise
not willing to get involved in particular PRs.  Another time killer.

In lieu of either your or my suggested ML, -hackers seems the best ML
for you and me (though I've not yet tried posting there, so I could be
very wrong).  Is -hackers good enough?  Is it even OK?

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?tmadtmhfdh.dtm>