Re: Newbie: section numbering option

Mark T.B. Carroll wrote:
> Jeff Kingston <[email protected]> writes:
> 
>>> may I suggest to create [a usenet group]?
>> Let's see what the others think.  I had bad experiences years ago with
>> usenet groups filled with rubbishy posts, I had to unsubscribe in the
>> end.  Perhaps things have improved.  The mailing list works well.
> 
> I find comp.lang.* generally good for the less popular languages, e.g.,
> comp.lang.haskell. I doubt a comp.lang.lout or whatever would attract
> the religious wars that groups like comp.lang.lisp or comp.lang.misc
> can.
> 
> Whether or not it's worth it for everyone to migrate there, and worth
> living for a little while among the trolls in news.groups (after all,
> trying to get a new alt.* group propagated well would be a bit of a
> pain, so I assume we're thinking somewhere in comp.*, hence the big-8
> process) while arguing for group creation, I don't know. I don't know if
> we really have enough traffic for it to be worth it.

Yeah, to be frank, I don't think we're big or active enough to 
warrant a usenet group.

I'm a big believer in personnel redundancy and sustainability for 
small FLOSS projects, that is, the problem of how to keep it 
running in the long term in the face of personnel changes or 
disappearances. For many of us, Lout may not be the primary Free 
or Open Source project we contribute to, and thus it is lower down 
on our list of priorities. Would someone still be active on this 
list in 2014? It's really hard to say. Continuity can sometimes be 
a very fragile thing.

The current mailing list is fine, a very efficient interface to 
people used to mailing lists. But I don't think we have enough 
volunteer manpower to extend ourselves some more into the "support 
and service" areas without running into sustainability issues.

-- 
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia