Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <3B055468.4796204F@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:57:12 -0400
From: Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: proposed spear catchers
References: <20010516194038 DOT A20462 AT redhat DOT com> <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20010518102351 DOT 02112880 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com> <200105181438 DOT KAA12989 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <4541-Fri18May2001154928+0100-starksb AT ebi DOT ac DOT uk> <20010518105904 DOT B4571 AT redhat DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 03:49:28PM +0100, David Starks-Browning wrote:
> >On Friday 18 May 01, DJ Delorie writes:
> >> > Sure, why not.  This one's easy.  Can anyone say "Read the FAQ"? ;-)
> >>
> >> On the DJGPP list, the person who wrote the FAQ (Eli) happens to be
> >> very active in the group.  Everyone else *knows* that if the answer is
> >> in the FAQ, Eli will post the section number, so we all know to wait
> >> for him to do it.  Having one person on the Cygwin list whose job it
> >> is to post "Please see FAQ section 4.6" for questions answered in the
> >> FAQ might make everyone else's job easier, and the mailing list less
> >> confusing.
> >
> >That would be me.
> >
> >I don't mind doing this.  At least, we can try it this way for a
> >while.
> >
> >I don't normally bother, because I anticipate being the 3rd or 4th
> >person to make such a response.
> >
> >In the past, I've had a lot of trouble keeping up with the list.  But
> >since volume has come down somewhat, I think I can keep up with the
> >traffic.
> >
> >Hope this helps.
> 
> Yep.  It helps a lot.  It may not hurt to have people in two time zones
> answering the questions.  I know that Larry is in the ESTEDT time zone.
> I don't know where Earnie is.
> 
> Do we need a script or possibly a standard wording in the email.  I think
> that repetition of a single way of responding is probably a good thing.
> 
> I think that repetition of a single way of responding is probably a good
> thing.
> 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=repetition+site%3Acygwin.com

-- 
Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com