Re: [foxboro] Utility submissions re-visited.

At 11:03 AM 10/12/01 -0500, David Johnson wrote:
 
>
>This is in reference to Cassandra Submissions, etc.
>
>I think that I must take the blame for Cassandra submissions not being 
>handled well.  Although they ultimately need to go to Duc for posting, 
>that's not really what I had in mind when I envisioned this project.

<... description of much work involved snipped ...>

In that case, do you think another list, something like foxboro-workers, is
needed? I would think it's better to segregate the traffic so as not to
overwhelm the casual list subscribers, and it will help to remain on-topic.

I have no problem maintaining two lists, but if there is anyone who wants to
share in the fun, talk to me, off-list.

Duc

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp

 
 
___________________________________________________________________
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by The Foxboro Company.
Use the information obtained here at your own risk. For disclaimer,
see http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html#maillist

list info:   http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
subscribe:   mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave

Other related posts:

  • » Re: [foxboro] Utility submissions re-visited.