www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: Press PR (was Re: The board is not responsible!)
Date Sat, 25 Oct 2003 05:11:12 GMT
> when I subscribed to some mailing lists, I got stunned
> at seeing the fact that some mailing lists accepted
> spam mails.

Some lists were setup wrong.  AFAIK, none of the lists should accept mail
from non-subscribers without moderation.

> I thought that this was tightly related to the negligence of
> infrastructure committees' nobless obligations.

There are several 100 lists at present.  It might be possible to write a
script to validate some aspect of ezmlm configuration.  But to refer to it
as negligence or nobless oblige is unfair to the people who work their arses
off maintaining the infrastructure.

Your example of Reply-To sounds like like a mistake in implementation that
of policy.  Mistakes happen.  If there is an error in the setup instructions
or scripts, that can be fixed.

> Maintanance of "site" is not "infrastructural" one. Rather, public
> relations.

Actually, maintenance of site is a responsibility of the Members.  Every
Member has the ability to regenerate site.  If is very simple.  As with any
anakia-based site, the basic steps are:

  1. cvs co/up site
  2. make changes to xdocs
  3. run the build script (included in the module)
  4. commit changes.
  5. sign onto the live server
  6. cvs up live site

> Also, I think that the overall watching the XX.apache.org site
> would be important. PR committee should do just "suggestions",
> however, unified view would suffice the users' gratifications.

Anyone can make suggestions.  The oversight of each domain is the
responsibility of that PMC.  If you feel that there is a problem, let them
know.  If there is a real problem and the PMC fails to act, there are other

> ApacheCon Advert?? ... PR committee.

I think the ApacheCon committee did a pretty decent job of it.

> Also, please reduce the burdens of infrastructure team.

We reduce the burden of the infrastructure team by finding more trustworthy
and competent people.  Without the people, it doesn't matter how you slice
the task, the same people still need to do the work.  And that is the thing
I am noticing about your proposal.  You keep proposing disparate groups, but
the real need is for additional people.  People who can be vested with some
of the responsibility of helping to provide a secure infrastructure for the
entire ASF.

There was a time when DLR was the only person who had a clue about
eyebrowse.  It could be months before things were fixed.  Berin Lautenbach
and myself volunteered to learn about eyebrowse, and hopefully have helped
to fill that void.

And we are starting to deploy tools that can shift capabilities from a
central group to the groups that need them.  For example, Jira lets us put a
great deal of partitioned control into the hands of a project's developers
and PMC.  That means that the "core" Jira support folks can focus on keeping
Jira running, not on answering lots of requests for change from the
projects.  Subversion will reduce the burden on root and cvsadmin.

IMO, the greatest improvement will come from a larger pool of resources, and
from tools that securely distribute capabilities.  In some respects, the
latter will help develop the former.

	--- Noel

To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org

View raw message