From nobody Tue Jun 22 15:58:42 2021 X-Original-To: emulation@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB0811DBDF4 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 15:58:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4G8WKH5bgmz4tvd; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 15:58:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from aniel.nours.eu (nours.eu [176.31.115.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 91632C027; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 15:58:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: by aniel.nours.eu (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 2BE61387BD; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:58:42 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:58:42 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: emulation@freebsd.org, postmaster@freebsd.org Subject: Killing the vbox alias, or making it something different Message-ID: <20210622155842.xaqcwtxnalc3zvbi@aniel.nours.eu> List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-emulation List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N Hello everyone, one thing that we are doing during the migration is making it mandatory for the mailing list to be either in CC or in the To, which means aliases to a mailing list will not work anymore. As of right now all email to vbox@ are bring rejected. In anycase, I can't find a valid reason to have a vbox alias to emulation@ why not make emulation@ the maintainer of the vbox software directly? Are you fine with me deprecating the vbox@ in favor or direct use of emulation@ ? Best regards, Bapt