| 1 |
W dniu nie, 03.12.2017 o godzinie 14∶46 +0100, użytkownik Ulrich Mueller |
| 2 |
napisał: |
| 3 |
> > > > > > On Sun, 03 Dec 2017, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Proposal |
| 5 |
> > ======== |
| 6 |
> > Give the failure of other solutions tried for this, I'd like to |
| 7 |
> > establish the following changes to the mailing lists: |
| 8 |
> > 1. Posting to gentoo-dev@ and gentoo-project@ mailing lists will be |
| 9 |
> > initially restricted to active Gentoo developers. |
| 10 |
> > 1a. Subscription (reading) and archives will still be open. |
| 11 |
> > 1b. Active Gentoo contributors will be able to obtain posting access |
| 12 |
> > upon being vouched for by an active Gentoo developer. |
| 13 |
> > 2. A new mailing list 'gentoo-expert' will be formed to provide |
| 14 |
> > a discussion medium for expert Gentoo users and developers. |
| 15 |
> > 2a. gentoo-expert will have open posting access like gentoo-dev has |
| 16 |
> > now. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I don't believe that introducing a category of "expert users", in |
| 19 |
> addition to developers and users, makes much sense. What mark would |
| 20 |
> distinguish the gentoo-expert list from gentoo-dev on the one hand, |
| 21 |
> and gentoo-user on the other hand? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
My idea was to introduce the following gradation: user -> expert user -> |
| 24 |
developer. The difference between 'users' and 'expert users' being that |
| 25 |
the former usually look for basic support and help while the latter |
| 26 |
usually don't need explicit help and are more interested in influencing |
| 27 |
how the distribution is developed. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> Generally I think that our mailing lists should be defined by topic |
| 30 |
> and not by target audience. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> So, how about this instead: |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> ᚠ᛬ Do the changes proposed in points 1., 1a. and 1b. from above, but |
| 35 |
> only for the gentoo-dev mailing list. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> ᚢ᛬ Revive the gentoo-council mailing list and move all council related |
| 38 |
> business from -project to there. The same rules as for -dev would |
| 39 |
> apply to -council, i.e. 1., 1a. and 1b. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I think this point is worthwhile considering separately. A split between |
| 42 |
'Council agenda' and pure replies, and the related discussion may |
| 43 |
certainly be beneficial to some degree. That is, as topics for |
| 44 |
the Council meeting are discussed separately from the agenda |
| 45 |
submissions, and we don't end up splitting the discussion in two. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> ᚦ᛬ No changes to the gentoo-project mailing list. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Well, my idea was to use -dev and -project to split between technical |
| 51 |
and non-technical topics, with both mailing lists being otherwise |
| 52 |
equivalent. Furthermore, I should point out that the problems have |
| 53 |
historically applied to both of those mailing lists, and I'm worried |
| 54 |
that this variant would only result in 'trolls' shifting their |
| 55 |
activities towards the latter channel. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
However, we could try this variant as well, if you think it'll help. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> This would still keep gentoo-dev free of trolls, and at the same time |
| 60 |
> (re-)introduce a clean communication channel for council related |
| 61 |
> postings. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
-- |
| 64 |
Best regards, |
| 65 |
Michał Górny |
Archives