Commit messages revisited

Randal wrote:
 > This is false. There are clearly exceptions to what you just said.
That is exactly why spam works for spammers: there are exceptions.

 >If you replace "the community" with "stephan eggermont", it's a lot  
more true. But you're just a *part* of the community.
There are different people in the community. This list serves  
different purposes for different people.
If the active core committers feel that they need to send these  
messages to this list, they should do
so. I am not important to this list. There are other lists I can use.

I'd prefer a reaction to the problems I describe. I can see that core  
developers
like this amount of information, but I fail to understand how this  
helps the community
grow. We're only getting half the non-commit related posts we had  
before.

Igor wrote:
 >My opinion, that decision upon whether 'spam' the list with bot  
messages
 >or not should be up to the people who are contributing,  
participating and
 >helping Squeak move forward, not those who just stick around.

Of course. That's the reason I waited a few months to say something.
I just couldn't let Ken's claim stand. From 1627 subscribers, 18 spoke  
out for commit
messages and 14 for digests.

Stephan Eggermont

Hi,

Am 2009-10-23 um 20:53 schrieb Stephan Eggermont:
> Of course. That's the reason I waited a few months to say something.
> I just couldn't let Ken's claim stand. From 1627 subscribers, 18  
> spoke out for commit
> messages and 14 for digests.

Make that 19:14.
Oh, and I'm not a core developer. :)

Greetings,
        -Tobias