incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: [Discussion]
Date Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:29:07 GMT
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Marcus (OOo) <> wrote:
> Am 08/19/2011 06:34 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:


>> So why wouldn't we want to shut down that list?
> Why are you asking when you want to do it anyway? ;-)

Clearly I have my own opinion on this.  But I'd like to understand the
counter-argument, if there is one.

>> is getting 20 spam per day.  I'm a moderator on
>> ooo-dev and we see maybe 1 spam every 2 weeks.
> I said I see up to 20 spam mails on the other both ML. I don't know how much
> we get on dev@ooo.


>> Real posts at are infrequent and are not getting
>> responded to.   But ooo-dev is clearly where the thriving dev
>> discussion is occurring.
>> Aren't these good reasons to consolidate the dev discussion in one
>> place? Is there any advantage to have it be fragmented across two
>> lists, especially if one list is mainly getting spam?
> If so, it would be the same reason to shutdown also other mailing lists. So,
> we could do it will all.

I think the dev list is special, because we have an active Apache list
that has the identical purpose. The same is not true for many other lists.

> As Mathias said, the shutdown will happen anyway. No need to force it.

We are currently missing opportunities when new volunteers post to the
other list and do not get a response.  Also, existing subscribers to
the list are missing out on the discussions we are
having regarding things like reorganizing the source repository, etc.

The goal should be to encourage existing subscribers to move over to
ooo-dev.  There are several ways of doing this.  An announcement, like
Matthias sent, is a good thing.  Maybe also update this page:

For lists that have been migrated,  put instructions there on how to
subscribe to the Apache list.

If we delay shutting down the list until a later point, that is fine
with me.  I just wanted to see if anyone thought there was a reason to
preserve the list longer-term.

> Marcus
>>> It seems that #1 is the best way for the moment as long as the old ML are
>>> still working. But maybe together with a note. Then the possible new
>>> participant 1) gets an (first) answer, #2 knows that it goes on at ASF,
>>> and
>>> #3 knows the new ML.
>>> My 2 ct.
>>> Marcus

View raw message