Re: subbing lists to each other
Hi Karsten,
On 08/14/2012 10:25 PM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
Anyone know what might happen if we subscribe the project mailing
lists to arch@?
It'll work, but in general it's not a good idea. And if you have
Reply-to mangling enabled it breaks.
I know the "try to avoid duplicates" is set in Mailman.
Will that cover?
Nope - that will only cover situations where you are emailing a list of
which you are a member, I believe.
The deal is, we must have one generic all-project mailing list. When
we see there are more people subscribed to engine-devel@ than arch@,
what should we think & do? Leave them alone in their corner?
My best advice is that you should have the general/central mailing list
be so useful & high quality that everyone who needs to be there *wants*
to be there.
I think the cross-posting, and the mailing lists with big cross-sections
(I can't be the only person signed up to infra, users, arch, board and
announce) makes it hard to figure out which list is appropriate for a
message. The website discussions, for example, are particularly
troublesome, because they touch our users, but there is a need to
include board, and we really want the feedback of the core developers,
and changes to the website affect the infra team.
The best suggestion I have, in that case, is to consult Users about
where the website is lacking, make a proposal & have a discussion based
on that on arch, take the results of that to board for approval/comment,
and then talk to infra about the practicalities of making the changes.
But including all 4 groups in all the discussion just makes it harder to
follow and less useful for everyone.
How can we be integrated if we don't have all project people on
one
central mailing list?
We don't need all of the project people, just the "important" ones.
On the other hand, everyone on engine-devel@ doesn't have to
know
about the cross-project materials relevant to arch@ if they don't want
to - I respect that right. But that requires other people on
engine-devel@ to pass along *all* key information. Is that fair?
I think that there will be some collateral damage during a transition
period, if we decide to discourage cross-posting and try to formalise
the goals of each list, and what's on-topic there. At some point,
someone on engine-devel will be unhappy that something was discussed and
decided on arch, and they didn't hear about it. The ironic solution to
that problem is to tighten the scope of all the lists, and cross-post
the new proposed scope to them all :-)
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Neary
Community Action and Impact
Open Source and Standards Team, Red Hat
Phone: +33 9 50 71 55 62