Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 15:37:59 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: john-users vs. john-dev (was: Getting more from DYNAMIC)

On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:53:05PM +0200, Nicolas RUFF wrote:
> Sorry for the misunderstanding, I re-posted on 'john-users' as suggested.

Thanks!  As you can see, you got a couple of replies there, which may
also benefit other users.  There are almost 7 times more subscribers on
john-users than on john-dev, so it'd be a pity to keep those user
relevant replies restricted to the john-dev membership only.  And like I
said, almost everyone on john-dev is supposed to also be on john-users.

> PS. At first look I had the impression that 'john-users' was more like
> 'dude, where is my config file ?'.

This is precisely what I am trying to change.  The separation between
the users and dev lists is not meant to be basic vs. advanced stuff, it
is meant to be user-relevant vs. development-only.  Before john-dev was
setup, everything was on john-users (well, and in private e-mail, etc.)
Then we setup john-dev to move in here discussions of source code
changes, which end-users (even advanced ones) would mostly not be
interested in (and the few who are interested could join us on john-dev).
Unfortunately, a side-effect of that was that some other advanced topics
also moved in here, thereby shifting the focus of the john-users list to
more basic topics.  This doesn't have to be so.

> As I actually had a look at John
> source code before asking my question, I felt empowered to reach
> 'john-dev' :)

It's not about (not) being "empowered".  It is about benefiting more
people with the resulting discussion thread.

Thanks again,

Alexander

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ