On 02/01/2026 03:23, Enji Cooper (yaneurabeya) wrote:
On Jan 1, 2026, at 5:47 AM, Dmitry Salychev<[email protected]> wrote:
Paul Floyd<[email protected]> writes:
On 2026-01-01 07:19, Mark Millard wrote:
I've received a public request via part of a bugzilla
comment on a submittal:
"can you please stop treating our bug tracker and mailing
lists as your personal blog?"
My suggestion is that you try to cut down unnecessary detail. It can
sometime be difficult to find what the point of your messages are. If
people ask for clarification you can always add the details later.
I second this. It might also be hard for me to distill the message's
essence which is frequently hidden behind a pile of details.
I third this: more information isn’t necessarily better and there are different
ways of capturing different information (maybe a blog or diary would be helpful
for raw form ideas like that :)!). If something gets too noisy, I tune it out
(and potentially miss some helpful information in the meantime). …
Earlier, I mentioned the constraints and very many peculiarities of email.
Above, quotation levels have broken.
In a thread elsewhere, a request for clarification (for additional
details) might break quotation levels and/or wrapping.
The subsequent details might additionally break quotation levels and/or
wrapping.
Distillation of a message = its essence. A subject line is essential, a
_good_ subject line is essential, and if the essence (the distillation
is) presented _as_ the subject line, the essential change of the subject
line will please some people, will displease others.
We can not please everyone.
Less information, succinctness, is not necessarily better. I could
share an example of succinctness that breaks all ground rules of the
FreeBSD Community Code of Conduct. My reason for not sharing here and
now is not mutual respect for the value of brevity.
FreeBSD-specific information that is blogged beyond the freebsd.org
domain pleases some people, displeases others.
Some of the people who are not pleased are absent from the less than
entirely public places where values such as centralisation are discussed.
