incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
Date Tue, 01 Nov 2011 23:47:21 GMT
Hi Joe,

On Nov 1, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:

> Actually you should know I'm the main
> guy who deals with the mail services
> at the ASF, so yeah considering my opinion
> as relevant might be wise ;-) MX at ASF questions

(1) In hosting OOo MX will there be a need for any real mail boxes?

(2) Any trouble with double forwarders for securityteam@OO.o?

(3) There are currently about 330 MLs that the project would like to forward. Kay and Rob
are emailing these lists and informing about the new lists.

It would be good to have these ML forwarders exist as long as the ASF is handling

(4) There are less than 100 PPMC/Committers. Some of them have their lives revolving around
their OOo forwarder.

Should we allow these trusted people to have their OOo email be forwarded. I would say to
their apache id, but I bet many people in the project have their apache id pointing at
(There might be Apache committers unrelated to AOOo with their apache id forwarding to OOo.)

What do you think?

Does the size of groups (3) and (4) bother you if these are continued for a long time?

(5) There are identifiable and relatively large numbers of individuals with OOo in other systems
where we think it would be good to continue for some time measured in months. Rob has numbers
in the 40,000 or 80,000 range.

This would be phased out or terminated.

Does the initial size of (5) bother you?


>> ________________________________
>> From: Dave Fisher <>
>> To:
>> Cc: "" <>; 'Lawrence Rosen' <>
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 6:38 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
>> Hi Joe,
>> On Nov 1, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>> Sigh, forwarding aliases are simply rows in a
>>> databasesomewhere.  At one point that database
>>> was owned by Oracle, and they certainly can
>>> transfer it's contents to us without any concerns
>>> about privacy violations.  This has nothing to
>>> do with mailing list subscriptions, which are
>>> a completely separate issue.  If Oracle doesn't
>>> transfer the forward data to us, they stop working
>>> altogether, and no reasonable active users are expecting
>>> that to happen.  OTOH I have no interest at all in
>>> supporting the continued use of those forwarders
>>> beyond their existence in legacy OOo applications,
>>> and even there I'd like to see a reasonable and concerted
>>> effort to phase them out completely over a significant
>>> time period.
>> I think most of us agree that we do not want to keep these @OOo forwarders around
for very long.
>>> I didn't see anyone respond to my earlier suggestion,
>>> so I fear I may have been too reasonable forthis list.
>> Sorry, I should have. Whatever is decided you are the one who will help make it so!
>> Best Regards,
>> Dave
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Dennis E. Hamilton <>
>>>> To:
>>>> Cc: 'Lawrence Rosen' <>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 4:58 PM
>>>> Subject: RE: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
>>>> <orcmid response="in-line" />
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Lawrence Rosen []
>>>> <$68f003b0$3ad00b10$@com%3e>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 10:48
>>>> To:; 'OOo-dev Apache Incubator '
>>>> Cc: 'Dave Fisher'; 'Rob Weir'; 'Lawrence Rosen'
>>>> Subject: RE: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
>>>> Dennis Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> There are problems concerning migration of
>>>>>,, and
>>>>>  Consequently, all
>>>> ? addresses will be shut down when the
>>>>> migration goes into its final stages sometime in November.
>>>> Is going away or itself being renamed in November? I must
>>>> missed that announcement....
>>>> <orcmid>
>>>>    No,, the domain name, is being preserved,
>>>>    along with migration of the site's static content and the
>>>>    interactive bugzilla, wiki, and forums services.
>>>>    There are other services of the web site that are not
>>>>    being preserved.  This includes mailing lists that
>>>>    are operated (with addresses such as users@
>>>>    and an e-mail forwarding and identification service
>>>>    using addresses like myname@ (not
>>>>    entirely unlike orcmid@ and orcmid as an ID).
>>>>    Some services running at the original http:// *.OO.o
>>>>    web locations rely on the myname and myname@ OO.o as
>>>>    part of an identity system.  It is also the case that
>>>>    myname@ OO.o is a kind of widely-available vanity
>>>>    email address that is forwarded by the service @ OO.o.
>>>>    These addresses have been used, of course, as also a way
>>>>    to receive mail, with the myname@ OO.o forwarded to a
>>>>    "real" receiving address specified by the holder of
>>>>    myname@ OO.o.
>>>> </orcmid>
>>>>>    1. The presumption is that these addresses (and sometimes the
>>>>> services) cannot be preserved in the migration of the
>>>>> http://* properties from Oracle custody to
>>>>> Apache custody, even though the domain name can be preserved.
>>>> I don't understand that presumption. Custody of a website has nothing to
>>>> with the addresses within it or accessing it.
>>>> <orcmid>
>>>>    The problem is not with custody but with services operated
>>>>    at that address once the domain and the hosting is in
>>>>    Apache custody.  The presumption is that there will be no
>>>>    migration of the software nor the data that supports the e-mail
>>>>    forwarding and the user's ability to control the destination of
>>>>    the e-mail forwarding.  So, when the hosting is done by
>>>>    Apache, it is expected that this service and its data will
>>>>    be lost.
>>>>    Note, this is not so much about the addresses of the site,
>>>>    but how name@ OO.o is forwarded when it is not
>>>>    actually the address of part of the site (or, in the case
>>>>    of mailing lists, even when it is).
>>>> </orcmid>
>>>>>    2. There is an untested presumption that it is not legal to
>>>>> transfer those forwarding accounts because of rules about
>>>>> privacy and European trans-national data-sharing regulations.
>>>> If you can articulate this concern more clearly, I'll forward it to European

>>>> attorneys who can advise us.
>>>> <orcmid>
>>>>    The holder of a myname@ has a password for
>>>>    managing this little account.  In addition, the email
>>>>    address to which myname @OO.o is forwarded is kept in
>>>>    the account record.  Other information and parameters
>>>>    are either public or not personal.
>>>>       If the e-mail address to which forwarding occurs is
>>>>    considered private data, there is a concern that having
>>>>    the list be moved into Apache custody might constitute
>>>>    an infraction of some privacy policy or even regulatory
>>>>    policies concerning the handling and sharing of private
>>>>    information.
>>>>       The current location of storage of the list and
>>>>    operation of the forwarding service may be material
>>>>    factors in this case.
>>>> </orcmid>
>>>>> There is speculation that the disruption of e-mail is tolerable
>>>>> and that most of the current accounts have been abandoned.
>>>>> That view seems to ignore the importance of these identifiers
>>>>> as part of the provenance structure for contributions to the
>>>>> open-source project and the integrity of the code base and
>>>>> related artifacts.
>>>> I cannot personally judge the technical obstacles you identify, but my gut

>>>> tells me that we shouldn't disrupt the existing flow of Open Office activities

>>>> simply because ownership has transferred to Apache. Nor will it be reasonable

>>>> to ask our Infra team to manage 100K+ additional email accounts.
>>>> Can you advise us what the minimum that has to be done in order to let Open

>>>> Office continue in non-crisis mode about this?
>>>> <orcmid>
>>>>    There are two minima that I see.
>>>>    One is to allow the forwarding system to cease operation
>>>>    and let the breakdowns be whatever they are.
>>>>    The other is to arrange for the forwarding service to be
>>>>    migrated along with the site and operated as part of the
>>>>    re-hosted site still under the domain.
>>>>    This will require cooperation between Oracle and Apache
>>>>    Infrastructure.  Depending on the software involved, it
>>>>    will involve the PPMC providing technical administration
>>>>    for the maintenance of the service.
>>>>    If the forwarding is migrated, there would be no provision
>>>>    for adding new users.  Current users would be responsible
>>>>    for maintaining their own forwarding and, when desirable,
>>>>    retiring their use of the myname @OO.o at their
>>>>    convenience when there is no concern for someone attempting
>>>>    to send mail to it or use it as the basis for some sort of
>>>>    registration.
>>>>    This is independent from the concern about shut-down of
>>>>    mailing lists whose names are, similarly, listname @oO.o.
>>>>    Mailing lists and their archives are operated in an entirely
>>>>    different way and that is a separate problem, despite
>>>>    certain functional similarities.
>>>> </orcmid>.
>>>> /Larry
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Dennis E. Hamilton []
>>>> <$bacd0fe0$30672fa0$>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 10:00 AM
>>>>> To: OOo-dev Apache Incubator
>>>>> Cc: 'Dave Fisher'; 'Rob Weir'; 'Lawrence Rosen'
>>>>> Subject: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ e-mail addresses
>>>>> There are problems concerning migration of yourname@,
>>>>> listname@
>>>>>, and servicename@  Consequently, all
>>>>> yourname@
>>>>> addresses will be shut down when the migration goes into
>>>>> its
>>>>> final stages sometime in November.
>>>>> I don't have a solution.  I have an appraisal of the issue.  It is
>>>>> something
>>>>> that requires mutual understanding and, out of our mutual attention,
>>>>> the
>>>>> prospect of a workable solution.

View raw message