W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2012

Re: [HTMLWG] CfC: Create a Mailing List for administrative matters and notifications?

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 20:48:11 -0800
Cc: "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <B6648BA3-2FD3-42FE-A8AA-77A5D98ED798@apple.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

This CFC has now passed. The Chairs will work with the W3C Team to create new lists and will announce results once they are ready.

 - Maciej

On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:

> On 10/22/2012 03:46 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> 
>> I've heard from some that the major objection to using public-html for
>> certain technical discussions is not so much the other technical
>> discussion, so much as administrative matters that are considered noise.
>> Specifically, the things I have heard cited are bugzilla new bug
>> notifications, and CFCs and other "call" type emails. How would folks
>> feel about having a single unified technical discussion list, and then
>> one or more separate (still mandatory-subscription) lists for
>> administrative matters and notifications? If we can get consensus on
>> such an approach, it might supersede the need for a survey, but I will
>> try to get the survey out ASAP nonetheless, perhaps including this as an
>> option.
> 
> This proposal got some support and if there was any objections, I missed it.  This Call for Consensus is intended to determine if there are indeed any objections.
> 
> So to be clear: the proposal is to create another mailing list and to redirect the types of discussions described above to that mailing list.  If this call passes, the name of that mailing list would be determined by W3C staff, though constructive suggestions are welcome.
> 
> If you have any comments or concerns about this CfC, please respond by Wednesday, November 13th, 2012. Positive response is welcome and silence will be considered as agreement with the proposal.
> 
> If your comment is an objection, please clearly state that.
> 
> - Sam Ruby
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 04:48:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:35 UTC