Hi Michel,
Thanks for your mail.
The naming scheme seems a bit unintuitive, to someone used to the naming of our other mailing lists. Perhaps haskell-discuss or haskell-sig?
I see, perhaps we should have given it more thought and discussed it first on haskell-devel list... I'd just had this on my "todo" list for a long time and was glad to finally action it! :)
Renaming haskell-devel to haskell-scm, I guess, would not work as it gets Cc:ed on Bugzilla mail as well, as you have just noted.
Actually bugzilla and FAS are still using fedora-haskell-list@r.c and should be changed to point to the fedora mailing list.
So in that sense maybe renaming haskell-devel to haskell-bugs could also be an option. I am not sure how good mailman is about renaming its lists though, but probably it is possible.
[It would be good if Fedora had a proper naming scheme for its naming lists but it doesn't seem to have a consistent one. And noone consulted us about the name "haskell-devel" which I didn't find particularly intuitive either (to me "haskell-devel" implies/suggests the existence of some other mailing list (eg haskell or haskell-discuss, etc), but I assume the intention was to make give somewhat specific names to the lists to show their intended topic).]
If we renamed haskell-devel to haskell-bugs say (I never worked yet how to get scm commits to reach haskell-devel) do you still think we need to rename "haskell" list?
I am ok with "haskell" or "haskell-discuss" (somehow "haskell-sig" sounds a bit exclusive - I'd like to see generally interested Fedora users not just those directly involved in packaging also joining the list to follow and contribute to discussion.
How do people think?
Jens