commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stian Soiland-Reyes <>
Subject Re: [ALL] Too much traffic on the "dev" ML
Date Fri, 16 Jan 2015 15:25:19 GMT
While I am part of the [RDF] community - I would be careful about
sub-lists with "too few people" (e.g. <3).

As you said, voting on releases (and other PMC-level votes) should be
kept on the all-dev - formally then the sublist should not be a worry
- you wouldn't make a mailing list for two people anyway. Commits and
issues should definitely be on the sub-lists, if they exists - as they
would be part of the overall noise for everyone else.

It would be a relief to the [RDF] community, a separate mailing list
(e.g. would make it much more accessible to
invite non-committer third-parties who are involved just with
Commons-RDF during its design phase.

There's a danger of small & fresh sandbox communities ending up in a
fragmenting "mini incubator" (without the usual checks and balances)
if they start straight off in separate mailing lists. I would assume
only established sub-communities would go straight to a sub-mailing

Some older/stable commons-* things might not benefit have a dead
mailing list with 3 people - it's better emails from a user of
commons-semiabandoned get picked up in general list (hoping for a
volunteer) - so I guess this would be up for each sub-community to do
a [$project][VOTE] to see if they want their own sub-list. +3 should
be sufficient.

Perhaps forwarding this thread to the general@incubator list would be
appropriate - there we are currently discussing the possibility of
fresh projects bypassing the incubator process and become a
"probationary" TLP reporting directly to the board, and rather require
3 active mentors (with experience from "proper" PMCs) on the new PMC: (whenever the wiki is online)

Incoming Apache-majority communities like [RDF] and established,
active commons-* modules would probably fulfil that requirement
directly. The proposals have not mentioned what is the plan for
non-TLP podlings.

On 16 January 2015 at 00:47, Gilles <> wrote:
> Hi.
> In the discussion that started about RDF, it seems that the
> traffic volume is a stumbling block.
> [For some time now, it has been a growing nuisance, and the
> usual dismissal about filters won't change the fact: Setting
> up a filter that will redirect stuff to /dev/null is a waste
> of bandwidth.]
> If different ML are created, people interested in everything
> can subscribe _once_, and nothing will change for them.
> For people who spend a lot of time just deleting dozens messages
> and notifications a day, it will be a relief.
> Maintaining community conversation is not a problem: just
> create an "" ML for things that
> need input form a larger audience (like votes).
> Best regards,
> Gilles
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating)

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message