incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2011 19:38:06 GMT

I'm all for graceful degradation and removing sudden-death perils regarding the current
User-ID/e-mail-forwarding setup.  This seems to be independent of what concerns you and others
concerning the lists and I see no reason why they can't be parallel efforts, given the usual
concern for finding more resources beyond the already-overloaded volunteers.

Continuing my adventures into arm-chair astronaut instant design:

I think the most-important thing that Oracle could do right now, while the forwarding service
is operating, is send a bulk e-mail to all current myname@ account holders
asking them to opt-in to any transfer to Apache.  Bounces could be used to opt-out those accounts
and shrink the list.  It is most efficiently done there because the profiles and the account
control, as well as password recovery functions, are there now.

An opt-out could be done, but I personally favor an opt-in.  Since it require action, it would
have to be publicized quickly if Oracle concurs.  Unfortunately, opt-in may take some development
work Oracle-side.

I suppose an easy way to opt-out instead is to have folks blank out the forwarding address
for their accounts.  That might be easier. It would still be great to opt-out all of the bounces

 There might be some Apache-side work that could be done to support that, but nothing Apache-side
can go into effect until the transfer happens.  Still, it would be valuable to put up a page
at a non-threatened URL (maybe on OOUSER?) that the opt-out request could link to.  It might
be good to have translations in different languages also available on that Apache-side page.
 After cut-over, this might be updated to explain what did or did not happen.  I would want
to enroll some of our multi-lingual participants, including OOo Forum folk in that endeavor
as well as publicizing the change.

I think this would lead to a much-reduced list of active, willing myname@ forwarder
mapping and then it would be a matter of seeing how to host that reduced forwarding in some
sort of simple way.  I see that Infrastructure (and Shane) have some reluctance around this.

I also think the legalities need to be understood better and I believe Legal is checking on
that based on some table-talk I observed in some e-mails that hit my desk.  I await whatever
available course is determined in those inquiries.  I have no details nor any knowledge of
whatever Oracle grant was made concerning the site and the functions provided
in conjunction with the site.  I suspect that any agreement for the safe transfer of a sanitized
myname@ forwardings list will come from that effort and nothing I am privy

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:04
Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses

[ ... ]

I think the chances are near zero that Oracle will give us the
forwarding email addresses for 500,000 legacy
addresses.   I also think it is clear that we are wasting time
discussing this, time that could be spent making an unambiguous
notification to those that have these addresses, allowing them to make
an orderly transition to another address.  I further think it would be
an unmitigated disaster if the forwarding service got shut down with
little or no advance notice, because we wasted time discussing a plan
that we will never be able to execute on.

You might have different priorities than I have, but I hope you see
the logic in the above.  If we're not getting the authoritative
forwarding tables for the email forwarding, then we're wasting time
right now and we should immediately start working on a notification
for users currently using that service.

If that is true -- and I think it is -- then the single most important
thing we should be doing right now is establishing whether or not
Oracle would provide such forwarding tables.  I thought we asked
before and the response was "No".  But obviously that did not
penetrate to an equal degree in everyone's mind.

Would you agree that establish that simple fact is the most important
thing to do now?


>  - Dennis
> I also have an addition to my list of where there are breakages with these e-mail (not
list) addresses: Some number of iCLAs have e-mail addresses as the e-mail of
record.  That won't interfere too badly with those who have already been established as committers
(at AOOo at least) but it is another bullet item for my original list.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shane Curcuru []
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 05:05
> To:
> Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
> I'll butt in with my (non-binding) suggestions.
> On 11/2/2011 12:01 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>> where I am confused is the focus on Mailing-List forwarding rather than E-mail
>> forwarding.  I can't tell what the intended behaviors are.
>> Let's get clear:
>>   1. If someone posts to one of the old e-mail list addresses (e.g.,
>>, what is intended to happen?  What is the observed
>> behavior?  How does this extend to use
>> of -subscribe, -unsubscribe, -help, -owner (or their OO.o counterparts), etc.
>> ?
> After the final migration, they all bounce.  By then we should have nice
> friendly pages - easily searchable for - that tell past
> product version users which relevant Apache list to use.  And we'll have
> sent several "hey, this list is going away" notes to the old list.
>>   2. (a) If someone sends an e-mail to an existing account/e-mail address
>> (e.g.,, what is intended to happen?  What does the
>> individual that it current forwards to get to know or do about it?  The person
>> sending the e-mail?  If the forwarding bounces, what will happen?
>>      (b) If the account is closed/deleted, what are the 2(a) answers.
> After the final migration, if they're not a committer, they bounce.
> Period.  We are not in the business of providing services to non-committers.
> If they're a committer, then it's up to the PPMC to decide if 1) you
> want to, and 2) you will support some software to make committer
> forwarders work somehow.
> Apache projects use services to do their work.  I certainly
> expect - as such a hugely accessed service - that web access to
> will remain, along with a number of it's key subdomains.
>  But we really need to start thinking like the new Apache project that
> we're running, and not like some strange continuation of the past Oracle
> project that is now... unsupported.
> - Shane
>>   - Dennis
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dave Fisher []
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 20:35
>> To:
>> Cc:; 'Joe Schaefer'
>> Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
>> On Nov 1, 2011, at 8:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>> Whoa, now I am really confused.  This seems to have gone in the opposite
>>> direction than what I thought.
>>> First it narrowed down to privileging some small set of BZ users.
>>> And then protecting our committers that have email
>>> addresses.
>>> Also, I don't think there had been any intention to preserve the
>>> mailing lists.  Also, setting their addresses to forward to a
>>> different list that is not subscribed to is just weird.  So I don't
>>> understand the list forwarding scenario.
>>> And I have seen no one talk about moving the subscriber lists and adding
>>> those subscribers to a list they did not opt into.
>> Joe and I discussed doing it w/o subscriber lists. As a pure forwarder that's
>> choice one and two.
>>> I hope I misunderstand the common understanding about that.
>> You do. See my other reply.
>> [ ... ]

View raw message