[labnetwork] Labnetwork - Process?

[Duane Boning]

Hello all,

  Thanks for the helpful dialog on the list, and the question of
splitting it. Based on what I've heard, I will stick with the
single integrated labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu mailing list.

  I am making one change based on the discussion: I'll try to make
the archive pages searchable.

  As Matthieu notes, the archives are available through the link
at the bottom of all labnetwork emails; they are standard mailman
archives organized by date, thread, or subject. But unfortunately
mailman doesn't directly have a search facility.

  Fortunately, it looks like a good solution is relatively simple:
I can open up the archives so that they can be indexed by Google.
It may take a few days for the Google crawlers to walk the pages
and include in its index, but hopefully in the future you can do
searches for something like "labnetwork aaa bbb ccc" and get
connected up to relevant posts in the archives.

Take care,
/Duane

On 7/3/2014 4:34 PM, Matthieu Nannini wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> Is the list searchable ? I know one can browse the list archives
> but can you search it ?
> That would be the only downside of the mailing list if it wasn't
> searchable and maybe switching to a "one subject" forum engine
> like phpBB would be useful for search purposes if we don't want
> the questions to be duplicated.
> 
> -- 
> -----------------------------------
> Matthieu Nannini
> McGill Nanotools Microfab
> 
>> Walsh,Kevin M. <mailto:kevin.walsh at louisville.edu>
>> 3 juillet 2014 11:03
>>
>> I vote for  1 listserve
>>
>>  
>>
>> *Dr. Kevin M. Walsh*
>>
>> Ky nanoNET Director
>>
>> Samuel T. Fife Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
>> Founding Director of the UofL Micro/Nanotechnology Center
>>
>> 2210 South Brook St
>>
>> Shumaker Research Building, Room 234
>>
>> Louisville, KY 40292
>>
>> Office # (502) 852-0826
>>
>> Fax # (502) 852-8128
>>
>> *http://kynanonet.org/*
>>
>> Description: Capture for email signature**
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:*labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu
>> [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] *On Behalf Of *Morrison,
>> Richard H., Jr.
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 03, 2014 9:14 AM
>> *To:* Mac Hathaway; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
>> *Subject:* Re: [labnetwork] Labnetwork - Process?
>>
>>  
>>
>> I vote that we keep just one Labnet list. It will just make more
>> work for the person whom moderates the list today. I suggest
>> that we can ask any questions related to fab work including
>> process questions.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Rick
>>
>>  
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:*labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu
>> <mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu>
>> [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] *On Behalf Of *Mac Hathaway
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 02, 2014 9:56 AM
>> *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu <mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
>> *Subject:* [labnetwork] Labnetwork - Process?
>>
>>  
>>
>> Hey All,
>>
>> As there is still occasional uncertainty regarding the main
>> thrust of Labnetwork (i.e. general questions about cleanroom
>> operation and administration vs. more specific questions of more
>> narrow interest), I'm guessing that some Labnetworkers sometimes
>> don't ask certain question, out of deference to others...
>>
>> If this is the case, does it make sense to create a parallel
>> list, for instance "Labnetwork - Process" or "Labnetwork -
>> Equipment", where much more specific questions can be aired
>> without guilt(!), such as "Has anyone seen a difference between
>> 5x9s purity and 98% purity TMA in their ALD aluminum oxide?"  Or
>> do folks feel it's fine as it is?  I'm thinking a specific
>> process or equipment list might bring in other folks for whom
>> the general questions have not been sufficiently relevant to
>> merit their attention.
>>
>> Just a thought that came up during the UGIM...
>>
>>
>> Mac Hathaway
>> Harvard CNS
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> labnetwork mailing list
>> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
>> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>> Morrison, Richard H., Jr. <mailto:rmorrison at draper.com>
>> 3 juillet 2014 09:14
>>
>> I vote that we keep just one Labnet list. It will just make more
>> work for the person whom moderates the list today. I suggest
>> that we can ask any questions related to fab work including
>> process questions.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Rick
>>
>>  
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:*labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu
>> [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] *On Behalf Of *Mac Hathaway
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 02, 2014 9:56 AM
>> *To:* labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
>> *Subject:* [labnetwork] Labnetwork - Process?
>>
>>  
>>
>> Hey All,
>>
>> As there is still occasional uncertainty regarding the main
>> thrust of Labnetwork (i.e. general questions about cleanroom
>> operation and administration vs. more specific questions of more
>> narrow interest), I'm guessing that some Labnetworkers sometimes
>> don't ask certain question, out of deference to others...
>>
>> If this is the case, does it make sense to create a parallel
>> list, for instance "Labnetwork - Process" or "Labnetwork -
>> Equipment", where much more specific questions can be aired
>> without guilt(!), such as "Has anyone seen a difference between
>> 5x9s purity and 98% purity TMA in their ALD aluminum oxide?"  Or
>> do folks feel it's fine as it is?  I'm thinking a specific
>> process or equipment list might bring in other folks for whom
>> the general questions have not been sufficiently relevant to
>> merit their attention.
>>
>> Just a thought that came up during the UGIM...
>>
>>
>> Mac Hathaway
>> Harvard CNS
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> labnetwork mailing list
>> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
>> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>