incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Shutting down legacy OOo mailing lists
Date Wed, 19 Oct 2011 21:36:46 GMT

On 10/19/2011 01:18 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
> Two important comments:
> On 10/19/2011 4:11 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> On 17/10/2011 Rob Weir wrote:
> ...snip...
>> And (this is a vital detail) we should give a message of continuity, not
>> of disruption. We (in this context, i.e., Italian end-users mailing
>> lists) shouldn't communicate in a way that implies that the old
>> is dead and that a new is born, since the
>> product our users will be talking about in the mailing lists is still
>> the "old", and the fact that the new home is at Apache is
>> not a fundamental difference to them; they will continue using the
>> product and taking care, when the time comes, of localization and QA; we
>> would scare users and contributors away by describing an "old/dead"
>> I would turn the post you describe into a warning that the mailing list
>> address will change, including all information about Apache but not
>> requiring users to take action. I volunteer to consolidate the 12 lists
>> into 3 and to subscribe users to the right ones (of course, being
>> "project owner" of, I have a list of all subscribers
>> to the 12 lists).
> I agree that the message should be positive, and that it's a change of
> mailing list name, but it will still be used to help support users.
> Note that I disagree with having three lists; I would far prefer to
> start with a single list per NL. We've found in most projects that
> having fewer lists encourages a stronger community.

I would think one list per N-L would be fine for now. It would make 
where to go for what easier to manage in any case.

> In any case, details of which lists are which can be worked out in the
> wiki page listing the mappings, I'd hope.
>> One can find flaws in this process since, from a technical point of
>> view, we are mass-subscribing users; but remember that this is just a
>> migration. I read your remarks in other threads, but we don't risk to
>> help spammers this way (there is no spam on the 12 lists I monitor) and
>> it would be a suicidal move for to shut down mailing
>> lists and leave the majority of users in a position where they can say
>> " is dead, to the point that even the peer-support mailing
>> lists have been shut down".
> Actually, I'm pretty sure we will not be mass-subscribing users. That is
> generally regarded as a very bad idea in Apache projects, and given EU
> privacy laws I'm not even sure we should be auto-subscribing people to
> new lists. Rob noted, instead, that we'd make it easy for users on a
> specific list to click a link to subscribe to the new, equivalent list.
> ...snip...
>>> 7) After two weeks we request via Oracle that the Kenai admins close
>>> the lists, per:
>> I would change this into a one-month period in which the old addresses
>> still work but just as forwarders to the new (remapped) lists, followed
>> by a silent closure of the old addresses.
> I like the idea of the transfer period being a month instead of two
> weeks, if we believe the existing servers will last that long. Many
> users may not check these lists that often. But that's just my suggestion.
> - Shane


"There is no such thing as coincidence."
            -- Leroy Jethro Gibbs, Rule #39

View raw message