On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 09:30:46AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote: > firstname.lastname@example.org writes: > > > > > > Which means there needs to be a list to announce the comings > > > > > and goings of lists. > > > > > > Shouldn't that be the perl6-announce list? > > > > I don't know. > > > > I'm still expecting people to object to the idea of many many lists. > > What happened to the people who were saynig yesterday that there > > should only be a few lists? > > Tightly focussed, short lived (this list will self destruct in 14 > days) lists that report back to the main list are a somewhat different > proposition to the spectre of loads of 'permanent' lists that > (potentially) aren't as tightly focussed. Agreed. The other point is that it's the wg chair that will decide if a temporary sub-wg is appropriate (along with specifying the charter and lifespan etc). I think the key point is the the number of *top-level* wg's be kept quite small. How each of those wg chairs wants to run their own show is up to them, within reason. Tim.