On 06/11/16 15:20, KatolaZ wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 02:59:13PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
>> Based on the MLs description on [2], devuan-discuss is the primary ML for
>> requesting help and discuss about Devuan. That is wrong! The fact is that
>> DNG is the primary ML for such things.
>>
>> devuan-discuss is not useful and causing troubles: newcomers don't get help;
>> community is splits into 2 groups; ML activity gives a bad perception about
>> Devuan project activity.
>
> Sorry, but I don't get your point. The request you are talking about
> was posted to devuan-discuss after 21:00 (CEST) on Saturday 5th
> November. It is now Sunday 6th November, 14:16 CEST, so 17 long
> (weekend) hours have passed since that email appeared on
> devuan-discuss. Believe it or not, people might actually have
> something better (or simply different) to do during the week-end than
> waiting in front of their email client to address problems found by
> other users.

That was an example. The same issue posted here received an answer after
less than 20 minutes, with at least a temporary solution within, while
neither a solution nor a feedback was given on devuan-discuss yet.

DNG ML is a better place than devuan-discuss to get help, get feedback
and gauge Devuan project activity. The website does tell another story.
If people gauge Devuan project activity and community based on their
interaction with devuan-discuss, they will probably be disappointed. I
think it is harmful when it comes to attract more people inside the
community. That is my point.

Giovanni