Dear Martin, Thank you for confirming what I'd already suspected about the mailing list software.
I've added hydrology explicitly to the list description, and hope that the hydrologists find it a welcoming home. We've got a solid core of participants, so R users should find it a useful resource. Sarah On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Martin Maechler <maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm the "site maintainer" of the r-sig-...@r-project.org mailing > lists (and back from vacations). > >>>>>> Sarah Goslee <sarah.gos...@gmail.com> >>>>>> on Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:16:01 -0500 writes: > > > Hi all, > >> It would be great if Sara of someone of the maintainers > >> of the r-sig-ecology list could add that info to the info page. > > > I'm talking with the other maintainer about revising both > > the short and the long descriptions. > > >> I think that r-sig-env would be much more intuitive for > >> environmental scientists coming from fields different > >> from ecology, but I don't think it is possible to change > >> the name of an existing mailing list. > > yes, that would be only doable with much effort, > and (unless even more effort is put in) it would invalidate all > current links to the current archives etc. > > >> However, I'm wondering if it would be possible to create > >> an alias termed 'r-sig-env' to 'r-sig-ecology' ?, in > >> order to make the name of the list more intuitive for > >> environmental scientists but without disturbing the > >> current users. > > > I don't know that there is any mechanism for doing either > > of those things. Changing the name would be disruptive, > > and I don't know of an alias option. > > there is none, on the mailing list level. > On the mail server side, I could create such aliases, > but then these would only apply to e-mail addresses and the ML > software would still "speak" of the official ML name... > > Given all the issues and opinions heard so far, I'd also > propose trying to have hydrologists and other env.scientists > join the r-sig-ecology for the time being. > > Brian Ripley has already mentioned the very important point, > that there's some often non-negligible admin overhead for each > list, and I can add that indeed, we have had several lists that > always remained too small and so never "started flying". > -- Sarah Goslee http://www.functionaldiversity.org ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
