[OT] Off Topic?

[George Sanderson <ge...@xorgate.com>]

Is there anything special about putting things, like, [OT] in the subject
line, other than being informative?

The reason I ask, is that I would like to send [OT] messages to the most
appropriate list.  

Is there a reference that provides a list of lists for apache.org that can
be used to direct the message to the most appropriate list?


+================================+
| George Sanderson <ge...@xorgate.com>
| http://www.xorgate.com
+================================+

Re: [OT] Off Topic?

[Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>]

> Is there anything special about putting things, like, [OT] in the subject
> line, other than being informative?

No, but it does allow people to use automatic mail filters to ignore OT
messages.

> Is there a reference that provides a list of lists for apache.org that can
> be used to direct the message to the most appropriate list?

The list you want may or may not be at apache.org.  There is a list of
resources at the end of The Guide:
http://perl.apache.org/guide/help.html

However, there is a much more complete list for Perl at
http://lists.perl.org/.  And don't forget the USENET groups.  Also, there
are a whole bunch of people at http://perlmonks.org/ who are positively
chafing at the bit to answer tricky Perl questions for you.

- Perrin

Re: [OT] Off Topic?

[ed phillips <ar...@sirius.com>]

Robin Berjon wrote:
> 
> On Friday 12 October 2001 00:52, Ged Haywood wrote:
> > See attached.
> 
> Shouldn't that document go on perl.apache.org ? Last time you brought it up
> you thought that it wasn't perfect enough yet, but however relatively
> "imperfect" you may consider it to be (I think it's very good as is) it's
> certainly already helpful ! So can't someone simply commit it to the site ?
> Pretty please ?
> 

Yes, I read it and it looks good. Stas did not wait for the guide to be
perfect before he put it up. ;-) Can you remember what the guide was
like a couple of years ago? Put it up.

Ed

Re: [OT] Off Topic?

[Ged Haywood <ge...@www2.jubileegroup.co.uk>]

Hi guys,

On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, Robin Berjon and Ed Phillips wrote:

> On Friday 12 October 2001 00:52, Ged Haywood wrote:
> > See attached.
 
RB> Shouldn't that document go on perl.apache.org ? Last time you brought it up 
RB> you thought that it wasn't perfect enough yet, but however relatively 
RB> "imperfect" you may consider it to be (I think it's very good as is) it's 
RB> certainly already helpful ! So can't someone simply commit it to the site ? 
RB> Pretty please ?

EP> Yes, I read it and it looks good. Stas did not wait for the guide to be
EP> perfect before he put it up. ;-) Can you remember what the guide was
EP> like a couple of years ago? Put it up.

Thanks for the votes of confidence.

The reason it went no further earlier was that I received almost no
response from the RFC.  I've now updated my working copy of the site
(at a private URI) to contain this document and I'm awaiting feedback
on it before committing it.  I won't wait long...

73,
Ged.

Re: [OT] Off Topic?

[Robin Berjon <ro...@knowscape.com>]

On Friday 12 October 2001 00:52, Ged Haywood wrote:
> See attached.

Shouldn't that document go on perl.apache.org ? Last time you brought it up 
you thought that it wasn't perfect enough yet, but however relatively 
"imperfect" you may consider it to be (I think it's very good as is) it's 
certainly already helpful ! So can't someone simply commit it to the site ? 
Pretty please ?

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________
Robin Berjon <ro...@knowscape.com> -- CTO
k n o w s c a p e : // venture knowledge agency www.knowscape.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Radioactive cats have 18 half-lives.

Re: [OT] Off Topic?

[Ged Haywood <ge...@www2.jubileegroup.co.uk>]

Hi George,

On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, George Sanderson wrote:

> Is there anything special about putting things, like, [OT] in the subject
> line, other than being informative?

See attached.

73,
Ged.