From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753837AbZHFLCy (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 07:02:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753284AbZHFLCy (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 07:02:54 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:50133 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753176AbZHFLCx (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 07:02:53 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 13:02:47 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Russell King Cc: kernel list , davem@davemloft.net, mouw@nl.linux.org Subject: Re: linux-arm-kernel useless for development (was Re: Your message to Linux-arm-kernel awaits moderator approval) Message-ID: <20090806110246.GI31370@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20090804100051.GA17106@elf.ucw.cz> <20090804222840.GC18365@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090806100700.GC31370@elf.ucw.cz> <20090806104421.GA27773@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090806104421.GA27773@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 2009-08-06 11:44:21, Russell King wrote: > It appears the answer to that is no. People are free to subscribe to > the one on vger, where they won't have to "put up" with me. However, > it seems that people much prefer to subscribe to my lists, because that > seems to be where the expertise is. > > Moreover, > > (a) when ever you have a problem, you go shouting and making public > accusations without trying first to resolve the problem in private. When I tried asking in private, I was told to stop complaining or loose my mailing list subscription. I'd prefer not to make that mistake again. > (c) you really don't understand that "held for moderation" is *not* > rejection, but merely a case of mailman spotting something it doesn't > like and letting a *human* deal with it rather than out-right rejecting > it. For lakml, held for moderation _does_ mean it will return with "posting rejected: no reason given" in few days. I have never seen any other result, and have got perfectly reasonable messages rejected with "no reason". So no, I do not believe there's cooperative human being moderating lakml. > I wonder, do you even know what happened to the message you're whinging > about? Would you prefer that your message was silently dropped into > /dev/null instead of having a chance of the issue being resolved? It > strikes me that _that_ would be a better solution than all your > whinging. So... your solution to broken mailing list is to silence everyone who complains? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html