How is this different from module-authors@perl.org?

Its principal intended audience is much smaller: people who have taken over maintenance of CPAN modules from their original authors.

Not hosting it at perl.org will also give the perception that it's a second-class citizen list

At this point, I fully concede that it is a second-class citizen list -- because it hasn't proven itself. If people don't find it useful, its membership/readership will remain small and there will be no reason to host it at perl.org. If its readership grows, then transfer to a larger host would be worth considering.

I subscribe to several Perl lists which are not hosted at perl.org and, given their narrower focus, I think that's appropriate. There's More Than One Way to Host a Perl Mailing List.

Jim Keenan

Given that there's only about 2-3 messages per day in module-authors, and the issues that face modules-taken-over-by-others can't be all that different from original module authors, why not start with your traffic there, and then see if it warrants Yet Another List because of volume or distinct needs.

I don't mind people reinventing the wheel, but let's first prove the existing wheel is lopsided.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.

Given that there’s only about 2-3 messages per day in module-authors

Is that an alternate-universe module-authors? The one I’m on has about that many in a week, on average. :-)

(Which means I see even less point to a new list specifically for maintainers. There’d be what, 2-3 messages quarter-yearly?)

Makeshifts last the longest.