Re: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward
On 2011-07-12 07:19, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
If you have any questions or concerns please let me know.
I miss proper List-Id headers for identifying and filtering the list easily. I might have missed some discussion; but why are we moving away from mailman, and what software is in the new system? -- /ahnberg.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 04:13:10PM +0200, Mattias Ahnberg wrote:
I might have missed some discussion; but why are we moving away from mailman, and what software is in the new system?
Seconded. Mailman is presently the gold standard for mailing list management [1], and while a lift-and-drop of a Mailman instance from one host to another isn't entirely transparent/trivial, it's a fairly well-understood process, and there is certainly no shortage of assistance available for anyone who runs into problems with the task. If there is a plan to downgrade from Mailman to any of the alternatives, then those advocating it need to present compelling technical arguments that make the case why this course of action is necessary. ---rsk [1] This is not meant to suggest that I think Mailman is perfect; it's clearly not, and its maintainers would be among the first to admit that. But it's very good and consistently being improved.
On 13/07/11 11:37 PM, Richard Kulawiec wrote:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 04:13:10PM +0200, Mattias Ahnberg wrote:
I might have missed some discussion; but why are we moving away from mailman, and what software is in the new system?
Seconded. Mailman is presently the gold standard for mailing list management
Apparently the main exception to this is where you're running multiple lists with similar names, such as when creating lists for multiple languages (e.g. announce@example.com, announce@it.example.com, announce@jp.example.com, etc.). This is the problem the Document Foundation found itself with and they opted for mlmmj (with the exception of one list which does use Mailman), but it has other issues and I definitely wouldn't want to see NANOG go down that path. Since NANOG doesn't need to deal with the similar names/multilingual problem, that shouldn't be an issue. Regards, Ben
That issue can be resolved by changing email addresses for multiple language support by using announce-jp@example.com, anounce-it@example.com ? Alex On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Ben McGinnes <ben@adversary.org> wrote:
On 13/07/11 11:37 PM, Richard Kulawiec wrote:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 04:13:10PM +0200, Mattias Ahnberg wrote:
I might have missed some discussion; but why are we moving away from mailman, and what software is in the new system?
Seconded. Mailman is presently the gold standard for mailing list management
Apparently the main exception to this is where you're running multiple lists with similar names, such as when creating lists for multiple languages (e.g. announce@example.com, announce@it.example.com, announce@jp.example.com, etc.). This is the problem the Document Foundation found itself with and they opted for mlmmj (with the exception of one list which does use Mailman), but it has other issues and I definitely wouldn't want to see NANOG go down that path. Since NANOG doesn't need to deal with the similar names/multilingual problem, that shouldn't be an issue.
Regards, Ben
On 15/07/11 12:24 AM, Alex Ryu wrote:
That issue can be resolved by changing email addresses for multiple language support by using announce-jp@example.com, anounce-it@example.com ?
Yeah, that's how I'd get around it. I think the Document Foundation had some other issues, like wanting addresses to be consistent across a large number of subdomains and I can see their point with it. Obviously it's not a case that NANOG has to deal with. Regards, Ben
participants (4)
-
Alex Ryu -
Ben McGinnes -
Mattias Ahnberg -
Richard Kulawiec