Re: What about many many mailing lists?

On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 09:30:46AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> [email protected] writes:
> 
> > > > > Which means there needs to be a list to announce the comings
> > > > > and goings of lists.  
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't that be the perl6-announce list?
> > 
> > I don't know.
> > 
> > I'm still expecting people to object to the idea of many many lists.
> > What happened to the people who were saynig yesterday that there
> > should only be a few lists?
> 
> Tightly focussed, short lived (this list will self destruct in 14
> days) lists that report back to the main list are a somewhat different
> proposition to the spectre of loads of 'permanent' lists that
> (potentially) aren't as tightly focussed.

Agreed.

The other point is that it's the wg chair that will decide if a
temporary sub-wg is appropriate (along with specifying the charter and
lifespan etc).

I think the key point is the the number of *top-level* wg's be kept
quite small.

How each of those wg chairs wants to run their own show is up to them,
within reason.

Tim.