From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 1wt.eu (ded1.1wt.eu [163.172.96.212]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37B8E8F40; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 04:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=none Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 3A744Xf5023841; Tue, 7 Nov 2023 05:04:33 +0100 Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2023 05:04:33 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Konstantin Ryabitsev , users@linux.kernel.org, ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: RFC: switching "THE REST" in MAINTAINERS away from linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20231107040433.GA23816@1wt.eu> References: <20231106-venomous-raccoon-of-wealth-acc57c@nitro> <87r0l2yi7v.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 09:05:12AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 10:11:48AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > - due to the sheer volume of messages, LKML is generally seen as useless for > > > holding any actual discussions > > > > I have never had that impression of LKML. > > Same here, I am actually reading through lkml, although superficially > skipping over some bits, and definitively starting discussions there. Same here. I used to have a procmail filter to deliver lkml to its own box a decade ago and I figured that I lost contact with what was happening so I removed that filter so that I move all these messages manually several times a day after scrolling over them (a single key in mutt). This way every day I can have a quick glance at all subjects there, that's how I discover new topics, patch series, discussions etc. I think that a non negligible number of LKML subscribers are there for this exact reason. I would personally miss these messages if they would not be delivered there anymore :-/ And I don't think that the situation would significantly improve in the short term anyway due to this. > Restricting access to the new lkml is not acceptable. How about > restricting access to all lists for gmail addresses if gmail is so > broken? Or even simpler, flush the queue very often and make it clear that gmail is not a reliable recipiet for LKML. The trouble will self-regulate. Just my two cents, Willy