incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:20:53 GMT
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
<snip>

> Are the following two configurations accurate statements of what you would support.
>
> Configuration A - ezmlm/qmail on the usual ASF MTA
>
> 330 OOo MLs w/o subscribers forward to project MLs.
> <100 committers/PPMC members with OOo forwards to either an external email or their
apache forwarder. Just the apache address?
>
> Configuration B - postfix on a jail maintained by the project
>
> 330 OOo MLs w/o subscribers forward to project MLs.
> <100 committers/PPMC members with OOo forwards to either an external email or their
apache forwarder.
>>20,000 BZ OOo forwarders to external emails.
> Volunteers for postfix admin.
>
> I personally prefer Configuration A.
>
> Let's see if we get Consensus, or if we need a vote.
>

-1

What the helll do you think you are doing, Dave?

We had a discussion on the mailing lists already, for over a week.  i
made a detailed proposal. I invited counter-proposals.  My proposal
received lazy consensus.  I, Kay and others have been busy working on
the wiki and the mailing lists executing that proposal.  We're far
into it already.  We've sent out dozens of notes, translated it into
Finnish, German, Serbian, etc.    And now you're going to make a
counter-proposal and ask for a vote on it?

Before you do this, please consider what this does for other project
volunteers who follow the rules, make proposals, get consensus and
invest their time into executing on their proposals.

In any case, to put technical objections behind my veto, along with
the willingness to implement a alternative solution (something I've
already been doing for two weeks), note that many (even most) of the
legacy lists are overrun by spam.  The signal to noise ratio is very
low.  If we forward the traffic to those lists to Apache lists then we
are also overrun with spam.  But because we would be combining
multiple legacy lists into a single Apache list, say ooo-dev, then we
would be receiving all the spam from many lists concentrated into a
single list.  This is very bad, and was something we discussed
previously and influenced my recommendation to do only an opt-in
migration of legacy list members, to avoid bringing over the spammers.
 Note also that spammers that sign up for Apache lists can easily be
controlled by moderators.  But if we're automatically forwarding
legacy list traffic we have a lot less control.

One thing that might be useful is to forward all existing list
addresses to a single bot that would respond with an email that states
the lists have migrated to Apache and gives the new list addresses or
a link to a web page containing the same.  That would make it easy for
any users to migrate while leaving the spammers behind.

Regards,

-Rob

Mime
View raw message