From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Mar 5 13:27:15 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DA2D37B405; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 13:27:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70F9ABC94; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 13:27:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05556; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 13:26:56 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g25LUJ840373; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 13:30:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: anderson@centtech.com Cc: Brad Knowles , Murray Stokely , Nik Clayton , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: new FreeBSD mailing list References: <3C7AFCED.ADDE60EE@centtech.com> <20020226093250.A1369@canyon.nothing-going-on.org> <3C7BEF25.C1EEB8AD@centtech.com> <20020304215226.GG3250@freebsdmall.com> <3C84C9EE.71635BF8@centtech.com> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 05 Mar 2002 13:30:18 -0800 In-Reply-To: <3C84C9EE.71635BF8@centtech.com> Message-ID: Lines: 26 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Eric Anderson 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