Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 16535 invoked from network); 15 May 2007 09:18:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 May 2007 09:18:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 58488 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2007 09:19:04 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 58354 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2007 09:19:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 58345 invoked by uid 99); 15 May 2007 09:19:04 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 May 2007 02:19:04 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of gnodet@gmail.com designates 209.85.132.248 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.132.248] (HELO an-out-0708.google.com) (209.85.132.248) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 May 2007 02:18:57 -0700 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d40so533226and for ; Tue, 15 May 2007 02:18:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=OGaMLNqUr/MQHvBAQWpimU+RNXsqJD0ezIZotmEG3tw3LG+yaJhIbCVEwcfBkfQfP25x5HDjWBjMJkadgL070N7shOAC7FzWcfq8Pansl8whx61hOzthtFmHFuduabgA70mvlILWI3vp8/T+zSYX4h0LW/L199IW7UwiOIMfDOo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=odEdFtp653/2ODbsYsJeiILx+ADdW/gXZrNKvyU9Qx2pm/pHCUIhYQ6lsNjmngVgfn54YG+LwYcbg+iDYXRLKxk6Gvkr9+fkIDsKD2tZe4vBD7tcRPPBXR5vWRcvUEmsWsprr1Yd0yUSkp0QzAl5gkIYtvABMwQ36GagP6IpnEo= Received: by 10.100.91.6 with SMTP id o6mr5259201anb.1179220716403; Tue, 15 May 2007 02:18:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.121.10 with HTTP; Tue, 15 May 2007 02:18:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 11:18:36 +0200 From: "Guillaume Nodet" To: dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] separate Camel mailing lists? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_252316_23185841.1179220716286" References: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_252316_23185841.1179220716286 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline +1 On 5/15/07, James Strachan wrote: > > The volume of Camel related mails are rising and increasingly Camel > folks are talking about stuff thats unrelated to ActiveMQ. Given how > busy the ActiveMQ lists are (particularly the user lists) I'm starting > to worry about missing Camel related traffic in the deluge of ActiveMQ > related user mail. > > So I'm thinking its worth having separate mailing lists for Camel > related traffic which would also ease the email burden on forks using > either code bases. > > [ ] +1 to create camel-dev, camel-user, camel-commits mailing lists > [ ] -1 I disagree because: _________ > > > Here's my +1 > > -- > James > ------- > http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Principal Engineer, IONA Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------=_Part_252316_23185841.1179220716286--