Re: [Chandler-dev] Consolidating IRC channels

Yup, keeping both sounds good.

On Sep 15, 2008, at 2:42 PM, Sheila Mooney wrote:

> So what do we use now other than #chandler, #cosmo and #osaf-staff?  
> I guess we could officially get rid of the internal staff channel  
> although we haven't been using it at all really. Does everybody  
> still think we should keep both #chandler and #cosmo?
>
> On Sep 12, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Grant Baillie wrote:
>
>> Having more than one channel per staff member might indicate  
>> hubris to some people :D. I'd be up for way fewer channels, though  
>> maybe we should keep #cosmo around.
>>
>> --Grant
>>
>> On 12 Sep, 2008, at 15:14, Sheila Mooney wrote:
>>
>>> So, I was wondering how people felt about still keeping all the  
>>> IRC channels we have? Most of the traffic has been on the  
>>> Chandler channel, even some server related stuff and most interop  
>>> discussions. We also still have the OSAF-staff internal channel  
>>> that is rarely used. I was going to throw out the suggestions of  
>>> moving to a single Chandler channel for all discussions.
>>>
>>> What do people think?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Sheila
>>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>>
>>> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
>>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
>>
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev