Defining the core channels

Juha Siltala juha at
Tue Mar 16 15:07:18 UTC 2010

On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 10:30 -0400, idleone wrote:

> A core channel to me would be any channel that has a clear and definite
> goal. Team channels such as #ubuntu-women-project or #ubuntu-learning
> would be good examples. #ubuntu is also, in my mind at least, a core
> channel. As for -offtopic* channels I don't think they can be considered
> "core" channels as they tend to be more about relaxing and socialising
> although still very important to the community because they do give us a
> chance to get to know each other.

Please have a look at , which
(hopefully) lists all our channels. Your suggestion would make all of
them "core channels", save the few explicitly offtopic channels. I'm
afraid we would have a hard time managing the resulting workload. :-)

Also note that being "core" is not connected to being "important", as
stated in my original message.

I think, and I may be wrong, that we do have an idea of what the core
channels should be (and that they pretty much are already listed in the
Scope wiki page). We're not looking to change this vague idea but define
it. New channels may, however, be required at some point in the future
(of which we know little about!) and a clear definition would be useful
at that point.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Ubuntu-irc mailing list