From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-7053-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF9CD139083 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 21:16:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 59B04E0F1C; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 21:16:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 273F6E0F19 for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 21:16:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (d202-252.icpnet.pl [109.173.202.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46DC433BF51; Sun, 3 Dec 2017 21:16:33 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1512335789.22374.6.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= <mgorny@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2017 22:16:29 +0100 In-Reply-To: <23076.49.350195.910278@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> References: <1512256684.30000.48.camel@gentoo.org> <23076.49.350195.910278@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.5 Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: d7c6793d-1e6b-4958-803c-dc074324a877 X-Archives-Hash: 0e14eba56d21b818cbe4acd60a0a8b1a W dniu nie, 03.12.2017 o godzinie 14∶46 +0100, użytkownik Ulrich Mueller napisał: > > > > > > On Sun, 03 Dec 2017, Michał Górny wrote: > > Proposal > > ======== > > Give the failure of other solutions tried for this, I'd like to > > establish the following changes to the mailing lists: > > 1. Posting to gentoo-dev@ and gentoo-project@ mailing lists will be > > initially restricted to active Gentoo developers. > > 1a. Subscription (reading) and archives will still be open. > > 1b. Active Gentoo contributors will be able to obtain posting access > > upon being vouched for by an active Gentoo developer. > > 2. A new mailing list 'gentoo-expert' will be formed to provide > > a discussion medium for expert Gentoo users and developers. > > 2a. gentoo-expert will have open posting access like gentoo-dev has > > now. > > I don't believe that introducing a category of "expert users", in > addition to developers and users, makes much sense. What mark would > distinguish the gentoo-expert list from gentoo-dev on the one hand, > and gentoo-user on the other hand? My idea was to introduce the following gradation: user -> expert user -> developer. The difference between 'users' and 'expert users' being that the former usually look for basic support and help while the latter usually don't need explicit help and are more interested in influencing how the distribution is developed. > Generally I think that our mailing lists should be defined by topic > and not by target audience. > > So, how about this instead: > > ᚠ᛬ Do the changes proposed in points 1., 1a. and 1b. from above, but > only for the gentoo-dev mailing list. > > ᚢ᛬ Revive the gentoo-council mailing list and move all council related > business from -project to there. The same rules as for -dev would > apply to -council, i.e. 1., 1a. and 1b. I think this point is worthwhile considering separately. A split between 'Council agenda' and pure replies, and the related discussion may certainly be beneficial to some degree. That is, as topics for the Council meeting are discussed separately from the agenda submissions, and we don't end up splitting the discussion in two. > > ᚦ᛬ No changes to the gentoo-project mailing list. Well, my idea was to use -dev and -project to split between technical and non-technical topics, with both mailing lists being otherwise equivalent. Furthermore, I should point out that the problems have historically applied to both of those mailing lists, and I'm worried that this variant would only result in 'trolls' shifting their activities towards the latter channel. However, we could try this variant as well, if you think it'll help. > This would still keep gentoo-dev free of trolls, and at the same time > (re-)introduce a clean communication channel for council related > postings. -- Best regards, Michał Górny