Dear Fellow Ruby T.ers,
Short of creating a new list, is there means by which we can
collectively reduce the noise/signal?
For instance, the Freecycle mailing list and for-sale newsgroups use a
prepending of a class of subject to the title or subject of a post.
I’ll give it a guernsey. But what?.. Well, here’s my first (best?)
take:
CORE: A discussion of Ruby syntax largely without the implementation
specifics involving much C code and which might be otherwise more
appropriate for the core mailing list.
CORELIB: Discussions to do with extensions/modifications to the core
library but not syntax.
STDLIB: Discussion to do with extensions/modifications to the standard
library.
LIB: Discussion of existing non-core or non-standard libraries or
other bits of code. Additionally this could be for if you’re not sure
if it should go ‘in’ CORELIB, STDLIB, or if you’re being lazy…?
NEWLIB: Announcements of, or proposals for, and discussion of new
libraries. The suggested expiry on newness is a clear month. So, if
a library is released/suggested in January, then through the remainder
of January and all through February it is deemed new, but come March
it is then it becomes LIB:. I can see it now, libraries all being
released around the start of the month! Is that such a bad thing?
The 1st could be Library Day!
META: Discussion about the list itself. Perhaps ad hominem nonsense
can go here?
And rather than having a MISC: category it is probably better to make
it optional and to assume that everything else is not easily placed
into the above; although an explicit MISC: won’t go astray I
suppose…
Also, I understand that things go OT and that some posts may be in two
or more categories (in which case just use / to delimit each I
suppose), but is anyone else prepared to give this or some other
prepending a go?
I’ll volunteer to persist in using it for a very long time from now
and I’ve already started the ball as of the title of this post.
Sincerely,
t
P.S. I note the existing use of [ANN]. Are there others than [ANN]
which use this notation of []? These could be combined unless there
is conflict, as in: LIB:[ANN], NEWLIB:[ANN], or is [ANN]LIB: and
[ANN]NEWLIB: better? I find LIB:[ANN] clearer.
P.P.S. The use of an inverse ratio is deliberate. As in, less is
more, just like Ruby.