19 Oct
2020
19 Oct
'20
3:15 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hello,
As far as I understand there is no centralized tool allowing users to
manage their mailing list subscriptions. Each ML has to be individually
micro-managed.
Also MLs seem to assume that only messages from subscribed users are
allowed through (even though there is a nice message that informs you
if you are not yet subscribed that the message you just sent is
"pending approval", in my recent experience none of the messages I sent
this way actually went though).
So the business logic here entails that sending message to several MLs
pushes you under the following bus:
Either
your messages will land on the "waiting for approval" purgatory and
probably won't ever go through
Or
you have to manually subscribe to every single ML you want to write to
keep track of all of them (to avoid sending a message to the one ML you
forgot you weren't subscribed to); and you have to add filters to your
email client (as opposed to a centralized web manager) to avoid
drowning in a tsunami of emails; and you have to be empirical about
this, making sure your filters don't get false positives or negatives.
Not a cool dilemma. I mean ML clearly have their purpose but if I
didn't miss anything obvious, this does not help with making the ML for
attractive to people born after 1995.
Am I missing the obvious?
Also what's the margin for feasible improvements? How strong do we need
to push to shake up status quo?
Best,
Adrien
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEU4ol/0bSQTwqpAkNMy9Aieh+wJwFAl+NkY4ACgkQMy9Aieh+
wJzsBQf9GR19TZXld33zFfQzpSZGjs8QXGsWIVddQcaqAuJd1M0Wl+fFO2uYMTfI
iVdOXpxSG3iGpOH0EtW4e6hdppW3GopffUSM2tJKfvgSXM5NOgtpZA/rBUl7lneb
XOwWWD4bWn3w2pz1ucgAcc7NKv/ivkRoLnNqoH1zf6XUzLkDJfuvRYAKJf5A2NL3
Lt7/QnLoqYgsB+EOTdCwkN1utiogW1iVGgGs4SJsNSe96f9Dv9G1FWcT/Dw8IKho
zvObm4J2hHOY3oYGxzjaAup3lons8Rjol0xE7XYkOV1T+9CZn/8v6/97Iv/F0HhK
3bwC3jaEq0341VYfqDC8y9+ZAusPGQ==
=gkr0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
19 Oct
19 Oct
6:05 p.m.
On 19/10/2020 15.15, Adrien Glauser wrote:
Hello,
As far as I understand there is no centralized tool allowing users to
manage their mailing list subscriptions. Each ML has to be individually
micro-managed.
The mail lists are being migrated from mlmmj to mailman, and also the
mail server. So things will change, but it is a slow process donee be
some volunteers (the heroes team).
Also MLs seem to assume that only messages from
subscribed users are
allowed through (even though there is a nice message that informs you
if you are not yet subscribed that the message you just sent is
"pending approval", in my recent experience none of the messages I sent
this way actually went though).
Correct.
So the business logic here entails that sending
message to several MLs
pushes you under the following bus:
Either
your messages will land on the "waiting for approval" purgatory and
probably won't ever go through
Correct.
Or
you have to manually subscribe to every single ML you want to write to
keep track of all of them (to avoid sending a message to the one ML you
forgot you weren't subscribed to);
Most people only subscribe to those lists they really want. If you post
to one and it bounces, consider subscribing and resending, or renouncing.
and you have to add filters to your
email client (as opposed to a centralized web manager) to avoid
drowning in a tsunami of emails; and you have to be empirical about
this, making sure your filters don't get false positives or negatives.
Machine filtering is easy.
For this mail list, for example, filter on this header:
X-Mailinglist: opensuse-project
Every list has a similar header.
Mail lists are an "ancient" system, but they are efficient.
--
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 15.1 x86_64 at Telcontar)
6:31 p.m.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 9:16 AM Adrien Glauser <adrien.glauser(a)gmail.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hello,
As far as I understand there is no centralized tool allowing users to
manage their mailing list subscriptions. Each ML has to be individually
micro-managed.
Also MLs seem to assume that only messages from subscribed users are
allowed through (even though there is a nice message that informs you
if you are not yet subscribed that the message you just sent is
"pending approval", in my recent experience none of the messages I sent
this way actually went though).
So the business logic here entails that sending message to several MLs
pushes you under the following bus:
Either
your messages will land on the "waiting for approval" purgatory and
probably won't ever go through
Or
you have to manually subscribe to every single ML you want to write to
keep track of all of them (to avoid sending a message to the one ML you
forgot you weren't subscribed to); and you have to add filters to your
email client (as opposed to a centralized web manager) to avoid
drowning in a tsunami of emails; and you have to be empirical about
this, making sure your filters don't get false positives or negatives.
Not a cool dilemma. I mean ML clearly have their purpose but if I
didn't miss anything obvious, this does not help with making the ML for
attractive to people born after 1995.
Am I missing the obvious?
Also what's the margin for feasible improvements? How strong do we need
to push to shake up status quo?
The transition to Mailman 3 will give people a web-based centralized
mechanism to manage mailing list subscriptions. There will be some
other changes as well in terms of how emails are sent and received,
and how header-based filtering will need to be done for clients, and
those will be communicated relatively soon as the migration date is pinned down.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
8:25 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hey Neil & Per, thanks for your replies.
Neil,
The transition to Mailman 3 will give people a
web-based centralized
mechanism to manage mailing list subscriptions. There will be some
other changes as well in terms of how emails are sent and received,
and how header-based filtering will need to be done for clients, and
those will be communicated relatively soon as the migration date is
pinned down.
Wow that sounds awesome! Does it mean that any user with valid openSUSE
credentials (I have in mind the type of credials used by OBS and
accessible from the idp-portal) will be able to post to any of these
mailman 3 MLs without the hassle described in my previous email?
Best,
Adrien
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEU4ol/0bSQTwqpAkNMy9Aieh+wJwFAl+N2jQACgkQMy9Aieh+
wJwUTAf7BcD6OAvj5L5Jl8XaysM5xg12hPMtueT8xxeEaccX5YbdZk1uQOx4IrIL
ZAt9BlY9OlQnI3IDOWbModwH2wFK2YLK4GxM+Vy+O1fhg3AXiB8OKdv44aGxE97L
HbN1h8Nu//arBiLXZ/H8YdRp7JzNibLFZWYP0gKhIw9pW/Z0lPrclz5v/x5oFk/o
Z4c5rozsmOhH1KqHvvnIyFLmCoW4CafaV/HVEZU5q8LspK/N+y/qOXMixaIMqMhm
mSL2UJnfFgnj8MsnugVCjey/z43InR3RSINBh812P5yEgDMMqQ5OkMOHIG2TB7fl
ICOEA4BWAynP6X7jXnZaZRObFE0JYg==
=co32
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
8:55 p.m.
On 19/10/2020 20.25, Adrien Glauser wrote:
Hey Neil & Per, thanks for your replies.
Neil,
AFAIK no.
What it means, I understand, is that you can go to a single web page and
click to subscribe to several lists in one page.
--
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 15.1 x86_64 at Telcontar)
The transition to Mailman 3 will give people a
web-based centralized
mechanism to manage mailing list subscriptions. There will be some
other changes as well in terms of how emails are sent and received,
and how header-based filtering will need to be done for clients, and
those will be communicated relatively soon as the migration date is
pinned down.
Wow that sounds awesome! Does it mean that any user with valid openSUSE
credentials (I have in mind the type of credials used by OBS and
accessible from the idp-portal) will be able to post to any of these
mailman 3 MLs without the hassle described in my previous email?
9:08 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hey Carlos,
That's unfortunate. Ideally one would check for a sender's credentials
ahead of their actual messages to openSUSE MLs. This way the sender:
- - wouldn't get their message stuck in the purgatory, provided their
address was associated with the right credentials;
- - would only get the replies that use their address, so that they don't
have to worry about filtering (typically me when I spam many MLs but
don't want to receive all messages that are not direct replies).
Basically MLs as pure sets of receiving addresses, as opposed to now as
control structures doing much more than just broadcasting emails.
Too late too complicated to look into this workflow? Or perhaps I am
the only one in town to prefer this model to the actual / foreseeable
one...
Best,
Adrien
Wow that
sounds awesome! Does it mean that any user with valid
openSUSE
credentials (I have in mind the type of credials used by OBS and
accessible from the idp-portal) will be able to post to any of
these
mailman 3 MLs without the hassle described in my previous email?
AFAIK no.
What it means, I understand, is that you can go to a single web page
and
click to subscribe to several lists in one page. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEU4ol/0bSQTwqpAkNMy9Aieh+wJwFAl+N5DsACgkQMy9Aieh+
wJx77Qf/Xz0rmeSuy5Wn6gF6KoU+srgaG4ZPNq2CPk/e3BMw6LAtbqUqUZ2EtMmH
ZX54tu6ifnw9/zxoDSoVAbv21UnS88dayiNXnUynoiUYrQCOMjzyq30x86xoQSe5
1JZLqlpT98t/D/fGFnWd70OgJEBzOHdg+xvDu96M+tI19c+skmlrjurnVKe5ZOp1
gnDGVULKq3aC/sSJHkt+gJEip9ETg0nRCBrZHJArhLa/ScslvWMIMtZ6dV5p6qWn
sxJCskQZSJu1deor71yWrbpzbj4VPdxlQhmTyjsyw/wkJSY3JOr+FW64bNGUZzTm
yYKnuLbCbP9r1iab4+Nvr5oZrmgzQA==
=D/1e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
20 Oct
20 Oct
8:45 a.m.
Adrien Glauser wrote:
Hey Carlos,
That's unfortunate. Ideally one would check for a sender's credentials
ahead of their actual messages to openSUSE MLs.
Today, a subscriber's "credentials" are established when he subscribes,
automatically. That is how mailing lists have worked for two-three
decades, I'm not sure if there is much room nor need for improvement.
Wow that
sounds awesome! Does it mean that any user with valid
openSUSE credentials (I have in mind the type of credials used by
OBS and accessible from the idp-portal) will be able to post to any
of these mailman 3 MLs without the hassle described in my previous
email?
AFAIK no.
What it means, I understand, is that you can go to a single web page
and click to subscribe to several lists in one page. This way the sender:
- - wouldn't get their message stuck in the purgatory, provided their
address was associated with the right credentials;
- - would only get the replies that use their address, so that they
don't have to worry about filtering (typically me when I spam many MLs
but don't want to receive all messages that are not direct replies).
When you subscribe to the nomail version of a list,
a) your postings don't get stuck
b) you only get replies that are sent directly to your address.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (7.0°C)
Member, openSUSE Heroes
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
12:03 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Per,
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Today, a subscriber's "credentials" are
established when he
subscribes, automatically. That is how mailing lists have worked for
two-three decades, I'm not sure if there is much room nor need for
improvement.
if you support the migration (which is more like a migration +
overhaul of the whole user experience than just a change of storage),
you *very clearly know* where the room for improvement over the user
experience offered by two-three decades mailing system is. ;)
I am enthusiast about the migration. Let's see how it goes!
Cheers,
Adrien
This way the
sender:
- - wouldn't get their message stuck in the purgatory, provided
their
address was associated with the right credentials;
- - would only get the replies that use their address, so that they
don't have to worry about filtering (typically me when I spam many
MLs
but don't want to receive all messages that are not direct
replies).
When you subscribe to the nomail version of a list,
a) your postings don't get stuck
b) you only get replies that are sent directly to your address.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (7.0°C)
Member, openSUSE Heroes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEU4ol/0bSQTwqpAkNMy9Aieh+wJwFAl+OteYACgkQMy9Aieh+
wJyu+Af/Xa7aCwR7K5latxWeBbMmY+WQnNYWuOdsi7U3i/OH98fijY6F7iQETbkj
v0tJsQAVzwfEiyynDhnm2xhBQEenpx5CwWVzkn3OanFNvh7WDOlBfRzNoipfZZs/
MsXAd6FDfTNuWct0YG/mygmoLfppT8ibuUkErtrSPrDDykEg0/ief+v5i3nA9e7m
eVoJ/2WMQuGUNW8uG/MWkTHSpQpTnOfdKz1IVCDuLVzcfOwtXhkSmo5s/iWUwMTi
hvm5fQ3wGcWYsqvIGyuHp+NyxowG6JTGAJn1QglGad615E3fexYDm83u1JCxBxLZ
AEtgX2apwnnwCvkYsLbs8I4JaWhpCA==
=jfhK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
1:11 p.m.
Adrien Glauser wrote:
Per,
I not only support it, I initiated it - the main reason being lack of
functionality and incomplete features in our current mailing list
manager.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (15.9°C)
Member, openSUSE Heroes
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Today, a subscriber's "credentials"
are established when he
subscribes, automatically. That is how mailing lists have worked for
two-three decades, I'm not sure if there is much room nor need for
improvement.
if you support the migration (which is more like a migration +
overhaul of the whole user experience than just a change of storage), 
19 Oct
19 Oct
9:10 p.m.
Am Mo, 19. Okt, 2020 um 8:55 P. M. schrieb Carlos E. R.
<robin.listas(a)telefonica.net>et>:
On 19/10/2020 20.25, Adrien Glauser wrote:
Hyperkitty actually allows to create new threads and post replies to
existing threads. Postorius allows for managing multiple email addresses
with one account though, so what you said is still true.
LCP [Stasiek]
https://lcp.world
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Wow that sounds awesome! Does it mean that any
user with valid
openSUSE
credentials (I have in mind the type of credials used by OBS and
accessible from the idp-portal) will be able to post to any of these
mailman 3 MLs without the hassle described in my previous email?
AFAIK no.
What it means, I understand, is that you can go to a single web page
and click to subscribe to several lists in one page.
7:21 p.m.
Adrien Glauser wrote:
As far as I understand there is no centralized tool
allowing users to
manage their mailing list subscriptions. Each ML has to be
individually micro-managed.
Actually, I do the list management, whereas users merely have the
options of subscribing and unsubscribing. :-)
Also MLs seem to assume that only messages from
subscribed users are
allowed through
Yes, most of our lists only accept postings from subscribed users, that
is our default. It is a per-list setting - I think some lists are open
to non-subscribers.
(even though there is a nice message that informs you
if you are not yet subscribed that the message you just sent is
"pending approval", in my recent experience none of the messages I
sent this way actually went though).
It depends on the list and its owners/moderators - but yes, it is also
possible they were simply overlooked. Some go to ml-admin (which is me
amongst others) and I have been busy with other stuff. Basically, when
you get the nice message, the easiest solution is to subscribe and
resend.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (8.1°C)
Member, openSUSE Heroes
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
21 Oct
21 Oct
4:35 p.m.
Hey,
On 19.10.20 15:15, Adrien Glauser wrote:
So the business logic here entails that sending
message to several MLs
pushes you under the following bus:
And of course for reasons. Reasons that were sound in 1995 and that
still are sound today :-)
1. Sending mails to multiple mailing lists (cross-posting is the term
that is used for this) is frowned upon. Most lists have wildly different
topics. If you want to make an announcement to everybody and/or an
unspecifc group of openSUSE people, use the announcement list.
2. sending mails to a mailing list you are not subscribed to is frowned
upon as obviously can't be bothered with replies on the list, most
people also don't want to hear what you have to say.
There are more sound rules, you can find them on our netiquette
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Mailing_list_netiquette
Henne
--
Henne Vogelsang
http://www.opensuse.org
Everybody has a plan, until they get hit.
- Mike Tyson
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
6:55 p.m.
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 04:35:36PM +0200, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
Hey,
On 19.10.20 15:15, Adrien Glauser wrote:
Funny enough, both of these recommendations are the exact opposite of
the practice (and recommendations) in most developer mailing lists...
Michal Kubecek
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
So the business logic here entails that sending
message to several MLs
pushes you under the following bus:
And of course for reasons. Reasons that were sound in 1995 and that still
are sound today :-)
1. Sending mails to multiple mailing lists (cross-posting is the term that
is used for this) is frowned upon. Most lists have wildly different topics.
If you want to make an announcement to everybody and/or an unspecifc group
of openSUSE people, use the announcement list.
2. sending mails to a mailing list you are not subscribed to is frowned upon
as obviously can't be bothered with replies on the list, most people also
don't want to hear what you have to say.
There are more sound rules, you can find them on our netiquette
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Mailing_list_netiquette
22 Oct
22 Oct
10:20 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Just to be clear because it seems that some people are replying to
messages that presuppose a backlog they haven't read.
Issues with current model:
1) Errors messages are not bubbled up appropriatedly. If you send a
message not as plain text, you are met with an error message that does
not tell you the reason your message didn't go through.
=> Per already acknowledged this issue and told me it was quite deeply
entrenched within the backend. Whether mailman3 will work around this
or whether the issue won't occur in the first place, I don't know yet.
2) The "Pending approval" work-flow generates false assumptions. If you
send a message while not subscribed, you are met with a message that
says that your message is pending approval, building the assumption
that your message will probably go though within a reasonable span of
time. The assumption is however false, as far I have experienced.
=> Per also acknowledged that moderation could be delayed, but I don't
think mailman3 in itself solves this issue -- it's rather an issue of
what moderation settings one favors. From what I gather, nothing is
settled yet about how this will be handled by mailman3.
3) The current model makes 0 use of the platform-wide openSUSE user
auth + login system. In practice this means that users that want to use
MLs have to undergo as many authentication checks as there are MLs to
which they want to send to, and to keep track of each of them if they
don't want to run into issue (2) above.
=> It's not a compelling issue, it's more like a missed opportunity to
minimize convoluted work-flows and / or cognitive load for the user.
As per some of the answers on this ML I gather that the migration to
mailman3 won't improve on this.
4) Subscribing to a ML for the sake of sending a few messages is likely
to create the need for client-side filtering, as more messages than
those in which the sender is interested will be send back to them.
=> Ok, this is how ML have worked for a number of years, I'll grant you
that. But so what?
My humble suggestion to solve all these 4 problems at once, made
already but rehearsed here, goes like this:
a) authorize by default all and only those email addresses that users
have registered against the current openSUSE auth + login system to
send to any ML, no matter which
b) handle subscriptions to MLs closer to the literal meaning of
subscribing: i.e. open a receiver's channel, nothing less and nothing
more.
(a) + (b) solve all four issues, don't open loopholes for spams, and
bring the ML worflow closer to the workflow of forums and instant
messaging apps, making use of the comfort zone of people who already
use these platforms. This helps bring the two parts of the community
(forums people, other people) a tad bit closer to one another, adding
an extra little bit of peace and harmony to the cosmos.
Cheers,
Adrien
Le mercredi 21 octobre 2020 à 18:55 +0200, Michal Kubecek a écrit :
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 04:35:36PM +0200, Henne
Vogelsang wrote:
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hey,
On 19.10.20 15:15, Adrien Glauser wrote:
Funny enough, both of these recommendations are the exact opposite of
the practice (and recommendations) in most developer mailing lists...
So the business logic here entails that sending
message to
several MLs
pushes you under the following bus:
And of course for reasons. Reasons that were sound in 1995 and that
still
are sound today :-)
1. Sending mails to multiple mailing lists (cross-posting is the
term that
is used for this) is frowned upon. Most lists have wildly different
topics.
If you want to make an announcement to everybody and/or an
unspecifc group
of openSUSE people, use the announcement list.
2. sending mails to a mailing list you are not subscribed to is
frowned upon
as obviously can't be bothered with replies on the list, most
people also
don't want to hear what you have to say.
There are more sound rules, you can find them on our netiquette
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Mailing_list_netiquette Michal Kubecek
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEU4ol/0bSQTwqpAkNMy9Aieh+wJwFAl+RQOAACgkQMy9Aieh+
wJxKgQf8DVyD7PYb8JqRqwVFHikVuMkmJSmhVcKy7C58Wk5TYbqaRxb4k0CET5i8
xjKrBi6UX25TC/m4gsNoNvNB9FicsOxOb3NUnLqTBEAHuVkrUwMaiePEd4tp6ELT
6XinkBDnOJTffWJSiXHaAqooOENhK/f16UJrYIkjJ1KcVjqNCx4AQWE/hnIznA5X
8+1n0FwUQV0/viN9IpeelHl/Nld66yB+T6vmL9T41cacXzrysB/ukgSnqEJP8hDp
y4n6wRs74AP9cX16BoCN/LhqxzgrocX6+orK1GlZPNbruaUpmgVAsGDDO6h3NBUO
3LRmbPGBr2FlhTpND4FXaLxVio40zw==
=kBBG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
10:58 a.m.
Am Do, 22. Okt, 2020 um 10:20 A. M. schrieb Adrien Glauser
<adrien.glauser(a)gmail.com>om>:
Just to be clear because it seems that some people are
replying to
messages that presuppose a backlog they haven't read.
Issues with current model:
1) Errors messages are not bubbled up appropriatedly. If you send a
message not as plain text, you are met with an error message that does
not tell you the reason your message didn't go through.
=> Per already acknowledged this issue and told me it was quite deeply
entrenched within the backend. Whether mailman3 will work around this
or whether the issue won't occur in the first place, I don't know yet.
With mailman, we have a few options:
- Accept HTML mail
- Reject HTML mail (via MIME filter)
- Turn HTML mail into plaintext
and I honestly haven't played around with any of that yet. In the end I
think we want to make sure the subscribers get plaintext mail, so
turning HTML into plaintext may be the most user friendly of an option.
2) The "Pending approval" work-flow
generates false assumptions. If
you
send a message while not subscribed, you are met with a message that
says that your message is pending approval, building the assumption
that your message will probably go though within a reasonable span of
time. The assumption is however false, as far I have experienced.
=> Per also acknowledged that moderation could be delayed, but I don't
think mailman3 in itself solves this issue -- it's rather an issue of
what moderation settings one favors. From what I gather, nothing is
settled yet about how this will be handled by mailman3.
Your message will also land in a moderation queue with mailman if you
aren't subscribed if the settings remain similar, there really isn't
much difference there.
3) The current model makes 0 use of the platform-wide
openSUSE user
auth + login system. In practice this means that users that want to
use
MLs have to undergo as many authentication checks as there are MLs to
which they want to send to, and to keep track of each of them if they
don't want to run into issue (2) above.
=> It's not a compelling issue, it's more like a missed opportunity to
minimize convoluted work-flows and / or cognitive load for the user.
As per some of the answers on this ML I gather that the migration to
mailman3 won't improve on this.
Eh, you really can't blame anybody, nobody would have wanted to deal
with Novell's auth system more than they needed, so for most of the time
project was a thing, having auth in some services was done out of
necessity and not willingness.
4) Subscribing to a ML for the sake of sending a few
messages is
likely
to create the need for client-side filtering, as more messages than
those in which the sender is interested will be send back to them.
=> Ok, this is how ML have worked for a number of years, I'll grant
you
that. But so what?
That's why nomail subscription is a thing, being subscribed without
getting mails.
My humble suggestion to solve all these 4 problems at
once, made
already but rehearsed here, goes like this:
a) authorize by default all and only those email addresses that users
have registered against the current openSUSE auth + login system to
send to any ML, no matter which
That's not possible with the current mail system, since we can't
poll auth system for that kind of info afaik
b) handle subscriptions to MLs closer to the literal
meaning of
subscribing: i.e. open a receiver's channel, nothing less and nothing
more.
nomail
(a) + (b) solve all four issues, don't open
loopholes for spams, and
bring the ML worflow closer to the workflow of forums and instant
messaging apps, making use of the comfort zone of people who already
use these platforms. This helps bring the two parts of the community
(forums people, other people) a tad bit closer to one another, adding
an extra little bit of peace and harmony to the cosmos.
That's kinda the point of hyperkitty and postorius to begin with
LCP [Stasiek]
https://lcp.world
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
11:13 a.m.
Adrien Glauser wrote:
Issues with current model:
1) Errors messages are not bubbled up appropriatedly. If you send a
message not as plain text, you are met with an error message that does
not tell you the reason your message didn't go through.
=> Per already acknowledged this issue and told me it was quite deeply
entrenched within the backend.
ACK again :-)
2) The "Pending approval" work-flow
generates false assumptions. If
you send a message while not subscribed, you are met with a message
that says that your message is pending approval, building the
assumption that your message will probably go though within a
reasonable span of time. The assumption is however false, as far I
have experienced. => Per also acknowledged that moderation could be
delayed,
ACK again. This is at least partially due to our mailing lists not
having enough owners and moderators. Most of our lists have just one
owner (ml-admin) and no moderators which pretty much means I become the
bottleneck.
but I don't think mailman3 in itself solves this
issue --
it's rather an issue of what moderation settings one favors. From what
I gather, nothing is settled yet about how this will be handled by
mailman3.
Overall, I expect mailman3 to bring technical improvement, but no major
changes to list management policy.
4) Subscribing to a ML for the sake of sending a few
messages is
likely to create the need for client-side filtering, as more messages
than those in which the sender is interested will be send back to
them. => Ok, this is how ML have worked for a number of years, I'll
grant you that. But so what?
True, so what - it could be changed.
OTOH, you subscribe not just for "sending a few messages" but also for
receiving a few replies to those.
My humble suggestion to solve all these 4 problems at
once, made
already but rehearsed here, goes like this:
a) authorize by default all and only those email addresses that users
have registered against the current openSUSE auth + login system to
send to any ML, no matter which
This is doable, a nomail subscription for all. Although many will want
a regular subscription. (you can't have both on the same list).
Synchronization might be a stumbling block. Also, only one email
address is registered (afaik), and many people (incl myself) use
multiple.
b) handle subscriptions to MLs closer to the literal
meaning of
subscribing: i.e. open a receiver's channel, nothing less and nothing
more.
I'm not sure I really understand what you mean here - the above sounds
like what any mailing list manager does already ? i.e. you subscribe
to a mailing list and you start receiving traffic.
(a) + (b) solve all four issues, don't open
loopholes for spams, and
bring the ML worflow closer to the workflow of forums and instant
messaging apps, making use of the comfort zone of people who already
use these platforms.
Just for the sake of argument - whose comfort zone is more important,
the above or those of people who already use mailing lists?
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (15.2°C)
Member, openSUSE Heroes
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
11:52 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
To the point:
The backend logic I am assuming is:
- - for any message submitted to any ML, if the sender has *some* email
address associated with their account, let the message through;
where *some email* can be determined in many different ways, for
instance:
- - in openSUSE user profile (feature: "use this text-field to add as
many email addresses as you want our MLs to whitelist for you).
I notice en passant from what you just said that my proposal seems to
solve a 5th problem I overlooked in my previous message:
Issue
5) The current system (and mailman3!) enforce subscriptions as 1-1
relations between email addresses and MLs, when in fact there is 0 need
for enforcing this if users have sets of addresses whitelisted upstream
in the work-flow.
When you navigate a forum you usually don't need to subscribe to a
topic in order to be able to post to it. In that context "subscribing"
means "getting notified upon updates to the topic". My suggestion is to
move MLs closer to that meaning of "subscribing".
Care to explain in what way my proposal makes a negative impact on the
comfort zone of ML people? My understanding of its implications was
that it didn't change anything for ML people, while lowering the entry-
barrier for non-ML people in a reasonable way.
Perhaps all this is a nice on paper but is horribly bad as far as cost-
efficiency is concerned, which may well be the case if mailman3 does
not easily bend to such fine-tunings. I have no way of knowing that
beforehand unless I discuss these things here :)
Cheers,
A
My humble
suggestion to solve all these 4 problems at once, made
already but rehearsed here, goes like this:
a) authorize by default all and only those email addresses that
users
have registered against the current openSUSE auth + login system to
send to any ML, no matter which
This is doable, a nomail subscription for all. Although many will
want
a regular subscription. (you can't have both on the same list).
Synchronization might be a stumbling block. Also, only one email
address is registered (afaik), and many people (incl myself) use
multiple. b) handle
subscriptions to MLs closer to the literal meaning of
subscribing: i.e. open a receiver's channel, nothing less and
nothing
more.
I'm not sure I really understand what you mean here - the above
sounds
like what any mailing list manager does already ? i.e. you subscribe
to a mailing list and you start receiving traffic. (a) + (b) solve all four issues, don't open
loopholes for spams,
and
bring the ML worflow closer to the workflow of forums and instant
messaging apps, making use of the comfort zone of people who
already
use these platforms.
Just for the sake of argument - whose comfort zone is more important,
the above or those of people who already use mailing lists?
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (15.2°C)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Member, openSUSE Heroes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEU4ol/0bSQTwqpAkNMy9Aieh+wJwFAl+RVkEACgkQMy9Aieh+
wJxnwgf/efsP0Tf2Er8LtnBxdsyWkYuva25UXunFG7GqMkrxBooLd+JdcEmUch+F
NnaKbZqRMv++phWfTJAkjHmoiJg5ZTjrm+QAdtzHv4wWaFUGcAZ/Pun/b4aM3GFW
BR0X6n13bkRUBLnPSK3W+mdAlWMVsURBcc5prbUq49Ej76TL0TDdAnCjbYtLed7a
NjeN3WZOrGx9a7I/xuMZitzKTuPRU5esija5qPM+jEqFd2bdVowD78bP9VWy1S6I
HlAjLSPBa9FMZElEAY3ojLUWk0D+1M/00ltxclfqHy3RtZhnGZBkQB8jrCTPSvQ3
KDJ1ZzVopW+Q2dlMj5DbKItbPEVyeA==
=zXjo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
12:09 p.m.
Am Do, 22. Okt, 2020 um 11:52 A. M. schrieb Adrien Glauser
<adrien.glauser(a)gmail.com>om>:
When you navigate a forum you usually don't need to subscribe to a
topic in order to be able to post to it. In that context "subscribing"
means "getting notified upon updates to the topic". My suggestion is
to
move MLs closer to that meaning of "subscribing".
Posting a thread/response to a thread using hyperkitty automatically
subscribes you as a nomail subscriber to the list, so the forums analogy
stays relevant if the user ends up using hyperkitty.
b) handle subscriptions to MLs closer to the literal
meaning of
subscribing: i.e. open a receiver's channel, nothing less and
nothing
more.
I'm not sure I really understand what you mean here - the above
sounds
like what any mailing list manager does already ? i.e. you
subscribe
to a mailing list and you start receiving traffic. Perhaps all this is a nice on paper but is horribly
bad as far as
cost-
efficiency is concerned, which may well be the case if mailman3 does
not easily bend to such fine-tunings. I have no way of knowing that
beforehand unless I discuss these things here :)
Well, I would probably recommend suggesting some things upstream as
well, we are deploying this as a solution that's a huge improvement for
us, but may not be sufficient for the users yet. If you let me know
after getting a feature upstream, I would be glad to deploy it to our
servers.
https://gitlab.com/mailman
LCP [Stasiek]
https://lcp.world
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
1:27 p.m.
On 22/10/2020 11.52, Adrien Glauser wrote:
Care to explain in what way my proposal makes a
negative impact on the
comfort zone of ML people? My understanding of its implications was
that it didn't change anything for ML people, while lowering the entry-
barrier for non-ML people in a reasonable way.
For instance, I as user hate when somebody says "do not reply on the
list, I'm not subscribed and I will not read it." My instant reaction is
to not answer at all, or ignore the request and answer on the mail list.
With the current system you do not need any password to interact with
the mail list manager. It is done by sending special emails to the
server, which authenticates you based on you sending an email from the
subscribed email address.
Mailman, on the other hand, has a web page for controlling the
subscription and, in the older versions I have used, gives you an
automated password, and possibly a single one for several mail lists.
But it sends you a password reminder every month with the password in
clear text that can be intercepted. I don't think it can be integrated
with the openSUSE account - and then what about the people that are not
registered there?
Making it much different from what users of mail lists are used to,
would "impact our comfort zone", considering that we subscribe also to
other non openSUSE mail lists.
I would like to remind you about the "nomail" option. It is a mode of
subscribing to a mail list in which you do not receive list mail. It
simply authorizes you to post to the list. Possibly it tries to send you
replies to your post, but I'm not sure how it can make sure to send the
entire thread to you.
--
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 15.1 x86_64 at Telcontar)
1:35 p.m.
Am Do, 22. Okt, 2020 um 1:27 P. M. schrieb Carlos E. R.
<robin.listas(a)telefonica.net>et>:
Mailman, on the other hand, has a web page for
controlling the
subscription and, in the older versions I have used, gives you an
automated password, and possibly a single one for several mail lists.
But it sends you a password reminder every month with the password in
clear text that can be intercepted. I don't think it can be
integrated with the openSUSE account - and then what about the people
that are not registered there?
Thankfully that system is gone, and with postorius and hyperkitty it
just uses openSUSE account, and a lot of other social media accounts for
login.
LCP [Stasiek]
https://lcp.world
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
6:42 p.m.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:27:17PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 22/10/2020 11.52, Adrien Glauser wrote:
The standard is to reply both to author and the list - or, more
precisely, to everyone involved so far, i.e what "group reply" or
similar does. Replying _only_ into the list makes sense for huge flames,
not for technical discussion.
(Yes, I'm aware that the official openSUSE mailing list "netiquette" is,
sadly, exactly the opposite of the standard developer mailing list
netiquette, I already pointed that out.)
Michal Kubecek
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Care to explain in what way my proposal makes a
negative impact on the
comfort zone of ML people? My understanding of its implications was
that it didn't change anything for ML people, while lowering the entry-
barrier for non-ML people in a reasonable way.
For instance, I as user hate when somebody says "do not reply on the list,
I'm not subscribed and I will not read it." My instant reaction is to not
answer at all, or ignore the request and answer on the mail list.
7:40 p.m.
Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:27:17PM +0200, Carlos E. R.
wrote:
s/The/One/
On 22/10/2020 11.52, Adrien Glauser wrote:
The standard Care to explain in what way my proposal makes a
negative impact on
the comfort zone of ML people? My understanding of its implications
was that it didn't change anything for ML people, while lowering
the entry- barrier for non-ML people in a reasonable way.
For instance, I as user hate when somebody says "do not reply on the
list, I'm not subscribed and I will not read it." My instant reaction
is to not answer at all, or ignore the request and answer on the mail
list. is to reply both to author and the list
In my experience, the vast majority of our subscribers only reply to the
list - I acknowledge that some people practice replying to the author
and the list, but I don't. I believe it came about to make use of very
busy lists easier for everyone.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (14.2°C)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
8:10 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
El 2020-10-22 a las 18:42 +0200, Michal Kubecek escribió:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:27:17PM +0200, Carlos E. R.
wrote:
I don't see the relationship, sorry.
On 22/10/2020 11.52, Adrien Glauser wrote:
The standard is to reply both to author and the list - or, more
precisely, to everyone involved so far, i.e what "group reply" or
similar does. Replying _only_ into the list makes sense for huge flames,
not for technical discussion. Care to explain in what way my proposal makes a
negative impact on the
comfort zone of ML people? My understanding of its implications was
that it didn't change anything for ML people, while lowering the entry-
barrier for non-ML people in a reasonable way.
For instance, I as user hate when somebody says "do not reply on the list,
I'm not subscribed and I will not read it." My instant reaction is to not
answer at all, or ignore the request and answer on the mail list. (Yes, I'm aware that the official openSUSE mailing
list "netiquette" is,
sadly, exactly the opposite of the standard developer mailing list
netiquette, I already pointed that out.)
And being so, not respecting the netiquette does cause flame wars.
- --
Cheers
Carlos E. R.
(from openSUSE 15.1 (Legolas))
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iHoEARECADoWIQQZEb51mJKK1KpcU/W1MxgcbY1H1QUCX5HLDxwccm9iaW4ubGlz
dGFzQHRlbGVmb25pY2EubmV0AAoJELUzGBxtjUfVewYAnR+AAPvACFDU4ofxXxVE
lBx6WWyTAJsEwMF6kD8TBbjbImdSFplM9wo5Nw==
=QLog
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
24 Oct
24 Oct
12:58 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 08:10:23PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
El 2020-10-22 a las 18:42 +0200, Michal Kubecek
escribió:
For huge non-technical discussions taking place within one list, there
is little harm having whole discussion only within that list (but there
is no harm following the standard procedure either). For technical
discussions, e.g. issue reports, technical questions or proposed
patches, your (and, most unfortunately, official openSUSE) practice of
replying only "to the list" has severe drawbacks:
- people not subscribed to the list do not get replies at all
- for mails sent into two (or more) lists, part of the discussion is
only in one of them, part only in the other; people subscribed only
to one of the lists see only a random selection of the discussion;
those subscribed to both need to go through the tree twice
And, yes, the official openSUSE "netiquette" of not "cross-posting"
is
also fundamentally flawed.
For an illustrative example, take recent discussion about kernel upgrade
to 5.9 which started with a heads up sent to opensuse-kernel and
opensuse-factory. This was the best course of action as the topic
belongs to both and there are people subscribed to any of the lists who
are not subscribed to the other. If Jiří followed the official
recommendation and sent his heads up mail only to one of the lists,
people subscribed only to one of them would not receive the heads up
warning at all. Do you really believe it would be better? I don't.
And if you look at the discussions in both lists, you can also see an
example of why replying "only to _the_ list" is wrong: each of the two
lists now contains only a random subset of the discussion. People
subscribed only to one of the lists won't see big part of the discussion
at all. Is it desirable? I don't think so.
As a contrast, look at kernel developer mailing lists as an example of
mailing list culture which actually works. You don't have to subscribe
to a specific mailing list for an area you do not work regularly in just
to be able to ask a question, report an issue or submit a patch. You
just send it (also) there and you don't have to worry about not getting
replies because people (with rare exceptions) will use "group reply"
properly. And it does not really matter whether I read the discussion in
my inbox or any of the list folders because all replies (again, with
rare exceptions) will be in all of them.
Michal Kubeček
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
The standard is to reply both to author and the list - or, more
precisely, to everyone involved so far, i.e what "group reply" or
similar does. Replying _only_ into the list makes sense for huge flames,
not for technical discussion.
I don't see the relationship, sorry.
2:06 a.m.
On 24/10/2020 00.58, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 08:10:23PM +0200, Carlos E. R.
wrote:
I see your point, thanks.
No one explained this to me in many years, so thank you again.
El 2020-10-22 a las 18:42 +0200, Michal Kubecek
escribió:
For huge non-technical discussions taking place within one list, there
is little harm having whole discussion only within that list (but there
is no harm following the standard procedure either). For technical
discussions, e.g. issue reports, technical questions or proposed
patches, your (and, most unfortunately, official openSUSE) practice of
replying only "to the list" has severe drawbacks:
- people not subscribed to the list do not get replies at all
- for mails sent into two (or more) lists, part of the discussion is
only in one of them, part only in the other; people subscribed only
to one of the lists see only a random selection of the discussion;
those subscribed to both need to go through the tree twice
And, yes, the official openSUSE "netiquette" of not "cross-posting"
is
also fundamentally flawed.
For an illustrative example, take recent discussion about kernel upgrade
to 5.9 which started with a heads up sent to opensuse-kernel and
opensuse-factory. This was the best course of action as the topic
belongs to both and there are people subscribed to any of the lists who
are not subscribed to the other. If Jiří followed the official
recommendation and sent his heads up mail only to one of the lists,
people subscribed only to one of them would not receive the heads up
warning at all. Do you really believe it would be better? I don't.
And if you look at the discussions in both lists, you can also see an
example of why replying "only to _the_ list" is wrong: each of the two
lists now contains only a random subset of the discussion. People
subscribed only to one of the lists won't see big part of the discussion
at all. Is it desirable? I don't think so.
The standard is to reply both to author and the list - or, more
precisely, to everyone involved so far, i.e what "group reply" or
similar does. Replying _only_ into the list makes sense for huge flames,
not for technical discussion.
I don't see the relationship, sorry. As a contrast, look at kernel developer mailing lists
as an example of
mailing list culture which actually works. You don't have to subscribe
to a specific mailing list for an area you do not work regularly in just
to be able to ask a question, report an issue or submit a patch. You
just send it (also) there and you don't have to worry about not getting
replies because people (with rare exceptions) will use "group reply"
properly. And it does not really matter whether I read the discussion in
my inbox or any of the list folders because all replies (again, with
rare exceptions) will be in all of them.
But people that don't belong to the group, specially those reading the
mail archive later, will not see all the answers if some of the answers
were direct and not to the list (like those done by non-subscribers on a
list that rejects non-subscriber posts).
Michal Kubeček
--
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 15.1 x86_64 at Telcontar)
26 Oct
26 Oct
4:11 p.m.
On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 02:06:11AM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Yes, this model assumes that people don't have to be subscribed to be
allowed to send e-mails to the list.
Michal Kubecek
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
As a contrast, look at kernel developer mailing
lists as an example of
mailing list culture which actually works. You don't have to subscribe
to a specific mailing list for an area you do not work regularly in just
to be able to ask a question, report an issue or submit a patch. You
just send it (also) there and you don't have to worry about not getting
replies because people (with rare exceptions) will use "group reply"
properly. And it does not really matter whether I read the discussion in
my inbox or any of the list folders because all replies (again, with
rare exceptions) will be in all of them.
But people that don't belong to the group, specially those reading the mail
archive later, will not see all the answers if some of the answers were
direct and not to the list (like those done by non-subscribers on a list
that rejects non-subscriber posts). 
24 Oct
24 Oct
12:05 p.m.
On 24.10.20 00:58, Michal Kubecek wrote:
As a contrast, look at kernel developer mailing lists
as an example of
mailing list culture which actually works. You don't have to subscribe
to a specific mailing list for an area you do not work regularly in just
to be able to ask a question, report an issue or submit a patch. You
just send it (also) there and you don't have to worry about not getting
replies because people (with rare exceptions) will use "group reply"
properly. And it does not really matter whether I read the discussion in
my inbox or any of the list folders because all replies (again, with
rare exceptions) will be in all of them.
True, but does not work for opensuse lists where you need to subscribe
to be able to post to them (it would have worked for me, as I am
subscribed to both opensuse-kernel and opensuse-factory :-))
A change in this policy, maybe with the switch to mailman would be
possible / desirable(?) but it would need two things:
* "if you subscribed to one opensuse list, you can post to all lists"
* "use group reply as default"
But then, what about the "oh, a support question got (cross-)posted to
factory, where only development questions are allowed!!1!, now all
developers will instantly leave factory list" (presumed) problem?
There is no easy solution :-)
Have fun anyway,
seife
--
Stefan Seyfried
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over
public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
22 Oct
22 Oct
7:37 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: nomail
Carlos E. R. wrote:
I would like to remind you about the
"nomail" option. It is a mode of
subscribing to a mail list in which you do not receive list mail. It
simply authorizes you to post to the list. Possibly it tries to send
you replies to your post, but I'm not sure how it can make sure to
send the entire thread to you.
An address subscribed to the nomail version of a list will never receive
any mails from the list.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (14.4°C)
Member, openSUSE Heroes
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
10:36 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: nomail
On Thu 22 Oct 2020 07:37:25 PM CDT, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Hi
Then you use the likes of gmane and nntp (which I do), if a list is
missing, ask for it to be added to the gmame service.
--
Cheers Malcolm °¿° SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
Tumbleweed 20201021 | GNOME Shell 3.36.7 | 5.8.15-1-default
Intel DQ77MK MB | Xeon E3-1245 V2 X8 @ 3.40 GHz | Intel/Nvidia
up 6:30, 1 user, load average: 0.08, 0.13, 0.31
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
I would like to remind you about the
"nomail" option. It is a mode of
subscribing to a mail list in which you do not receive list mail. It
simply authorizes you to post to the list. Possibly it tries to send
you replies to your post, but I'm not sure how it can make sure to
send the entire thread to you.
An address subscribed to the nomail version of a list will never
receive any mails from the list.
12:12 p.m.
Le 22/10/2020 à 11:13, Per Jessen a écrit :
and for such, forums are better fitted than mailing lists (IMHO)
jdd
--
http://dodin.org
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Adrien Glauser wrote:
4) Subscribing
to a ML for the sake of sending a few messages is
likely to create the need for client-side filtering, as more messages
than those in which the sender is interested will be send back to
them. => Ok, this is how ML have worked for a number of years, I'll
grant you that. But so what?
True, so what - it could be changed.
OTOH, you subscribe not just for "sending a few messages" but also for
receiving a few replies to those. 
1:57 p.m.
On Thu 2020-10-22, Per Jessen wrote:
I believe we have a great moderator community on our forums (and
maybe other media like Discord)?
How about asking for volunteers for our mailing lists? Maybe some of
those moderators are willing to help there, too, or others step up,
so this doesn't all rest on your shoulders.
Ultimately any community needs an influx of new members not only to grow,
but even to remain stable. The question is: is this an either - or?
Or can we be more open, more accomodating (and if so, how) to new
participants without alienating existing ones?
Gerald
PS: Moving a bit outside of one's comfort zone may be good. That's
one good way to learn and grow. ;-)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2) The
"Pending approval" work-flow generates false assumptions. If
you send a message while not subscribed, you are met with a message
that says that your message is pending approval, building the
assumption that your message will probably go though within a
reasonable span of time. The assumption is however false
ACK again. This is at
least partially due to our mailing lists not
having enough owners and moderators. Most of our lists have just one
owner (ml-admin) and no moderators which pretty much means I become the
bottleneck. (a) + (b)
solve all four issues, don't open loopholes for spams, and
bring the ML worflow closer to the workflow of forums and instant
messaging apps, making use of the comfort zone of people who already
use these platforms.
Just for the sake of argument - whose comfort zone is more
important,
the above or those of people who already use mailing lists?
2:01 p.m.
Le 22/10/2020 à 13:57, Gerald Pfeifer a écrit :
I believe we have a great moderator community on our
forums (and
maybe other media like Discord)?
How about asking for volunteers for our mailing lists? Maybe some of
those moderators are willing to help there, too, or others step up,
so this doesn't all rest on your shoulders.
but is it necessary to moderate? (as long as there is no spam)
may be we can add a bottom line "hit "k" with thunderbird to ignore this
discussion" :-))
jdd
--
http://dodin.org
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
5:26 p.m.
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Ultimately any community needs an influx of new members not only to
grow, but even to remain stable. The question is: is this an either -
or?
Or can we be more open, more accomodating (and if so, how) to new
participants without alienating existing ones?
I don't think we are doing particular badly right now, but I am probably
not the right one to judge that. Still, we have a plethora of
communications channels - lists, fora, discord, irc, usenet, reddit,
various IM services. They are different and attract different
audiences. I don't think making any of them more open or more
accomodating will change that.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (16.9°C)
Member, openSUSE Heroes
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On Thu 2020-10-22, Per Jessen wrote:
I believe we have a great moderator community on our forums (and
maybe other media like Discord)?
How about asking for volunteers for our mailing lists? Maybe some of
those moderators are willing to help there, too, or others step up,
so this doesn't all rest on your shoulders.
Certainly, it is a fixed item on my todo-list. The key thing is
assigning an owner though, and then leave it to him/her to sort out the
rest. However, the truth is that there is _very_ little to do, which
is another reason why requests can take a long time. When I know my
mailbox is always empty, I might only check it once a week.
2) The
"Pending approval" work-flow generates false assumptions. If
you send a message while not subscribed, you are met with a message
that says that your message is pending approval, building the
assumption that your message will probably go though within a
reasonable span of time. The assumption is however false
ACK again. This is at
least partially due to our mailing lists not
having enough owners and moderators. Most of our lists have just one
owner (ml-admin) and no moderators which pretty much means I become
the bottleneck. (a) + (b) solve all four issues, don't open
loopholes for spams, and
bring the ML worflow closer to the workflow of forums and instant
messaging apps, making use of the comfort zone of people who already
use these platforms.
Just for the sake of argument - whose comfort zone is more
important,
the above or those of people who already use mailing lists?
83
days inactive
90
days old
32 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Adrien Glauser -
Carlos E. R. -
Gerald Pfeifer -
Henne Vogelsang -
jdd＠dodin.org -
Malcolm -
Michal Kubecek -
Neal Gompa -
Per Jessen -
Stasiek Michalski -
Stefan Seyfried