1 |
Kumba wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> - I envisioned three mailing lists, essentially: |
4 |
> * core |
5 |
> * dev |
6 |
> * project |
7 |
> |
8 |
> - core: private, dev-only mailing list for internal discussion |
9 |
> |
10 |
> * Possibility: becomes read-only to the public after |
11 |
> a set time limit, possibly 1, 2, 4, or 6 months. |
12 |
> Certain messages and threads could be marked (via |
13 |
> some feature, for example) to remain permanently |
14 |
> private, and thus would never be readable by the |
15 |
> public. This policy would NOT apply retroactively. |
16 |
|
17 |
I'm not sure about stuff in -core becoming publicly accessible. After |
18 |
all, isn't it in the private list for a reason? Perhaps summaries of |
19 |
-core discussions being forwarded to -dev would be a better option. |
20 |
However, I'm new to -dev, so if this is what already happens I don't know. |
21 |
|
22 |
> |
23 |
> |
24 |
> - dev: open, dev and user mailing list for technical discussions |
25 |
> about |
26 |
> the gentoo project. Topics would include package |
27 |
> addition/removal/masking announcements, EAPI discussions, |
28 |
> package development questions/inquires (i.e., from users, |
29 |
> but NOT help -- gentoo-user exists for that). |
30 |
|
31 |
Here's where we want the non-devs to get access. After all, not all |
32 |
development and debugging is done by devs. All the current devs were, |
33 |
at one point, users. Where did they get their start? My bet is they |
34 |
entered via the -dev mailing list, learned the ropes here, and |
35 |
eventually earned their dev status. If the -dev list is closed, where |
36 |
do the new dev-wannabes learn the ropes and get their voices heard? |
37 |
|
38 |
> |
39 |
> * Possibility: Package changes, such as moves, |
40 |
> deletions, additions, and so forth could also be |
41 |
> routed automatically to a -dev-announce ML, possibly |
42 |
> by prefixing the subject field with "[ANNOUNCEMENT]:" |
43 |
> (This prefix, would of course, be stripped by the |
44 |
> automatic mailer before posting to -dev-announce). |
45 |
|
46 |
Would it perhaps be better to send announcements to -dev-announce, and |
47 |
have that list forward to -dev? That way we avoid issues if a subject |
48 |
starts with [ANNONUCEMENT], for example |
49 |
|
50 |
> |
51 |
> * Possibility: topics could also include developer |
52 |
> recruitment and developer departure emails. However, |
53 |
> these may need to be sparse and impersonal (almost |
54 |
> machine-like) where-in it may be announced who joined |
55 |
> (First/Last name, developer name, IRC handle, etc..), |
56 |
> herd they'll be joining, and duties they'll perform, |
57 |
> including packages they may be maintaining. These can |
58 |
> also be routed to a -dev-announce ML. |
59 |
|
60 |
If these messages will be machine-like, why not have them |
61 |
machine-generated? When you become a dev, someone (you? the person |
62 |
that -dev-ifie's you?) fills out a form, and the information from the |
63 |
form is forwarded to the list. |
64 |
|
65 |
[snip -project] |
66 |
|
67 |
> |
68 |
> Basically, moderation is a tool to me, a tool that should be used |
69 |
> sparingly. Not used as a blanket cover, with the occasional someone |
70 |
> lifting up that blanket to peek outside (save that for the monster under |
71 |
> the bed). That said, however, I don't think we should totally dismiss |
72 |
> the idea of blanket moderation. |
73 |
> |
74 |
> Rather, I think we should first implement -project, put out enough |
75 |
> information to get people to use it, and watch it for a few months. By |
76 |
> and large, we may discover that simply giving another list for the |
77 |
> non-technical discussions may fix the problems on -dev, and moderation |
78 |
> won't be needed on either list. If, on the other hand, problems still |
79 |
> arise on -dev that -project did not address (or may've been potentially |
80 |
> created by -project's creation), then we can revisit the option of |
81 |
> blanket moderation then. |
82 |
|
83 |
I agree with this. Also, it gives a transition time for people to get |
84 |
used to the new idea. Don't create -project, then 3 months later say |
85 |
"that didn't work, we need to moderate -dev". Give it a little more |
86 |
time than that. Ensure that people are reminded, especially at the |
87 |
beginning, that there may be a more appropriate forum. |
88 |
|
89 |
> |
90 |
> Simply put: One Step At A Time. |
91 |
> |
92 |
> |
93 |
> |
94 |
> Cheers, |
95 |
> |
96 |
> --Kumba |
97 |
> |
98 |
|
99 |
My 2 non-dev cents, |
100 |
|
101 |
Kevin |
102 |
-- |
103 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |