incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it mailing lists
Date Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:03:28 GMT
Not true at this point.  The spamassasssin rules blocking Japanese-
encoded subjects were removed about a month or so ago.

----- Original Message -----
> From: Dave Fisher <>
> To: "" <>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 12:01 AM
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it mailing lists
>T here is a problem with Japanese, apache MLs and spamassassin. I hope that 
> won't be an issue with Italian.
> Regards,
> Dave
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 13, 2011, at 8:48 PM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>>  On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>  <> wrote:
>>>  I say do the pair.  I see no reason not to trust your experience and 
> judgment.  That goes the same for any other NL group active enough to want an NL 
> list on the podling and having active PPMC members to support them.
>>  We created a Japanese list a while ago, based on a similar degree of
>>  enthusiasm.  It has not received a single post yet.
>>  This too is part of our experience and should influence our judgment.
>>  I'd be happier creating new language lists if we knew why that other
>>  list did not work out, and had a plan for ensuring that future
>>  attempts were successful.
>>  Maybe things are simpler with a user list?  I see that the legacy
>>  "utenti" list still gets a lot of traffic and has a lot of
>>  subscribers.  The dev list, not so much.
>>  One way to factor this might be to permit language-specific user
>>  lists, just as we do for forums.  But we encourage a single ooo-dev
>>  list for everyone, in order to avoid fragmenting the discussions and
>>  the community. Make we could make better use of subject tags to
>>  distinguish localization threads?
>>  Then, if at some point we have so much localization-related traffic,
>>  then we might create a cross-language ooo-i10n list.  We could create
>>  that based on demonstrated need.  That could work well, since in the
>>  initial release or two we're going to have many common questions about
>>  Pootle configuration, general Apache process, etc.
>>  If then at some point specific languages generate such a heavy amount
>>  of traffic that it is impossible to work on ooo-i10n, then and only
>>  then should we consider language-specific localization lists.
>>  I'd also note that if we bring in a bunch of new project contributors,
>>  who have not been involved at Apache before, it will be critical that
>>  they start off on the ooo-dev list, to see how we work, how we make
>>  decisions, etc.   It would be disastrous to have part of the project
>>  being actively mentored and working together while other 'pockets' 
> of
>>  contributors work in self-imposed isolation.
>>  -Rob
>>>  I think enough is known to avoid a slippery slope into mailing-list 
> chaos.
>>>   - Dennis
>>>  -----Original Message-----
>>>  From: Andrea Pescetti []
>>>  Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 16:51
>>>  To:
>>>  Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it 
> mailing lists
>>>  On 13/12/2011 Shane Curcuru wrote:
>>>>  How much traffic do the existing Italian lists get?
>>>  The ones that we would map to the "users" list got a bit more 
> than 1000
>>>  messages in 2011 so far; the ones that we would map to the 
> "projects"
>>>  list got about 300, but is a mostly inactive project, so
>>>  when there is something to do for volunteers (read it as: strings to
>>>  translate for localizers and need for pre-release tests for QA
>>>  volunteers) in Apache OpenOffice we will see far more activity in the
>>>  "projects" list, so it would be good to have it from the 
> beginning.
>>>>  While I definitely understand the desire to have some user focus to 
> some
>>>>  of the lists (who are probably not very tolerant of lots of 
> technical
>>>>  discussions), and have a place to discuss project issues, I'm 
> really
>>>>  concerned that we're simply making more and more lists, and 
> will end up
>>>>  like OOo was with too many lists.
>>>  Well, 12 to 2 is already a significant reduction in the number of 
> lists.
>>>  The main problem is that we have two large, distinct, memberships: the
>>>  overlap between the peer support ("users") lists and the 
> volunteers
>>>  ("project") lists is limited to a few dedicated people, the 
> others
>>>  belong to either the "users" or the "project" area 
> and merging the
>>>  groups doesn't make a lot of sense, regardless of the traffic. It 
> would
>>>  be, obvious differences aside, like merging the Italian and French 
> lists
>>>  because the combined traffic is not huge.
>>>  So I'd still prefer that we map the existing dichotomy to two 
> different
>>>  lists, but if you or anyone else have a strong preference that we start
>>>  with one list only, we can start with a "users" list and try 
> to replace
>>>  only a subset of the current Italian lists.
>>>  Regards,
>>>    Andrea.

View raw message