📅 Original date posted:2015-06-15
📝 Original message:Andy Schroder
On 06/14/2015 11:19 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 5:15 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com
> <mailto:jgarzik at bitpay.com>> wrote:
>
> * ACK on moving away from SourceForge mailing lists - though only
> once a community-welcomed replacement is up and running
>
> * ACK on using LF as a mailing infrastructure provider
>
> * Research secure mailing list models, for bitcoin-security. The
> list is not ultra high security - we all use PGP for that - but it
> would perhaps be nice to find some spiffy cryptosystem where
> mailing list participants individually hold keys & therefore access.
>
>
> While I agree this is a good idea, this should not be a precondition
> for moving the public bitcoin-dev list. The security team needs to
> separately research/write tools needed for this.
>
> <jgarzik> warren, wanna just go ahead and create
> bitcoin-development @ LF?
>
>
> *More Feedback?* As for going ahead, perhaps we should wait to hear
> from more of the other technical leaders?
I'd say just move forward with creating the new list. Once the new list
is created, send an announcement encouraging people to join. The new
list will be an opt in change, so you can encourage a transition date,
but why require it? Maybe monitor the subscriber lists for each list and
provide people regular updates as to what percentage of the people in
the old list have subscribed to the new list. This will help inform
people whether the new list will be adopted or not. People may also miss
a single announcement e-mail. There are too many messages going through
the list right now, and everyone doesn't read the list regularly.
>
> *_More Questions_*
>
> *List Name?* Would people prefer "bitcoin-development" for he new
> list name instead of a shorter name like "bitcoin-dev"? I personally
> like the shorter name, but either is fine.
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo currently has
> "sidechains-dev", and "lightning-dev" is moving there sometime soon.
I vote for "bitcoin-dev", only because of the consistency with the other
projects that you mentioned, as well as the fact that I think there
should be at least some name change to avoid confusion between the new
and old lists.
>
> *Proposed Cut-Off Date?* Then we also need to agree on a date to cut
> off the old list.. Their sysadmin said we could have the new list
> auto-post from the old list for a short while. I wonder how well that
> works ... if that will result in double posting if people write to the
> new and CC the old list.. Needs a little research how well it would
> behave to have both lists operating during a transition period. I
> think we should announce a cut-off date when posts to the old list is
> shut off, July 15th, one month from now. Thoughts?
I'd say move forward with the new list and subscribe it to the old list.
That way the new list starts archiving the messages from here forward.
There may be a little bit of a problem if someone joins the new list but
not the old list, they may not be able to reply to a message sent to the
old list? You probably would get a duplicate delivery if doing this, but
you could encourage users who have joined the new list to turn off
delivery on the old list (this is an option in the mailman settings page).
Once greater than 50% of the members of the old list are members of the
new list, send out an announcement that the old list will be turned into
read only mode in 3 weeks and to use the new list only after that time.
This way you don't have to force use of the new list and a majority
agreement is required before doing so and a technical leader is not
required to enforce a change without a solid commitment from most of the
members. Right before the old list is shut down, send one final
announcement e-mail indicating it is closing and link to the new list
(so that new subscribers will be aware if they are looking at an archive
of some kind).
>
> *Moderators?* Mailman on the new server allows having separate logins
> for admins and moderators. I think the admins of the old SF project
> are gavin, jgarzik and sipa... they are kind of busy. Perhaps we
> should identify known trusted community members who can help with
> moderation. Usually this is dealing with "held" messages that are
> flagged by the spam filter
>
> Warren Togami
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/e4e35a74/attachment.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 555 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/e4e35a74/attachment.sig>;
Andy Schroder [ARCHIVE] /
npub1r3…n6ccq
2023-06-07 15:37:51
in reply to nevent1q…swpy
Author Public Key
npub1r375vdaydp5nnnytff6ee2kwzxak8whmwkmnkm6h67agr7dadfkqxn6ccqPublished at
2023-06-07 15:37:51Event JSON
{
"id": "a9d50e4a0826b8c9d06c78e2d9a4179b2fed0c7825122af39572ff596928d509",
"pubkey": "1c7d4637a4686939cc8b4a759caace11bb63bafb75b73b6f57d7ba81f9bd6a6c",
"created_at": 1686152271,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"810d20bcf991f0775ab3cca311351e013d4d782191b318764a6f2045d4a0f082",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"76187248a297e74972803620295d0c154a19cf9e3c7ae68e1d95f4036395ef2e",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"8502a34ff455a038f6a04f4e3cd053dcbb5d711b89a3d211e65615b00e0ed65d"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-15\n📝 Original message:Andy Schroder\n\nOn 06/14/2015 11:19 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:\n\u003e On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 5:15 AM, Jeff Garzik \u003cjgarzik at bitpay.com \n\u003e \u003cmailto:jgarzik at bitpay.com\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e * ACK on moving away from SourceForge mailing lists - though only\n\u003e once a community-welcomed replacement is up and running\n\u003e\n\u003e * ACK on using LF as a mailing infrastructure provider\n\u003e\n\u003e * Research secure mailing list models, for bitcoin-security. The\n\u003e list is not ultra high security - we all use PGP for that - but it\n\u003e would perhaps be nice to find some spiffy cryptosystem where\n\u003e mailing list participants individually hold keys \u0026 therefore access.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e While I agree this is a good idea, this should not be a precondition \n\u003e for moving the public bitcoin-dev list. The security team needs to \n\u003e separately research/write tools needed for this.\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003cjgarzik\u003e warren, wanna just go ahead and create\n\u003e bitcoin-development @ LF? \n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e *More Feedback?* As for going ahead, perhaps we should wait to hear \n\u003e from more of the other technical leaders?\n\nI'd say just move forward with creating the new list. Once the new list \nis created, send an announcement encouraging people to join. The new \nlist will be an opt in change, so you can encourage a transition date, \nbut why require it? Maybe monitor the subscriber lists for each list and \nprovide people regular updates as to what percentage of the people in \nthe old list have subscribed to the new list. This will help inform \npeople whether the new list will be adopted or not. People may also miss \na single announcement e-mail. There are too many messages going through \nthe list right now, and everyone doesn't read the list regularly.\n\n\u003e\n\u003e *_More Questions_*\n\u003e\n\u003e *List Name?* Would people prefer \"bitcoin-development\" for he new \n\u003e list name instead of a shorter name like \"bitcoin-dev\"? I personally \n\u003e like the shorter name, but either is fine. \n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo currently has \n\u003e \"sidechains-dev\", and \"lightning-dev\" is moving there sometime soon.\n\nI vote for \"bitcoin-dev\", only because of the consistency with the other \nprojects that you mentioned, as well as the fact that I think there \nshould be at least some name change to avoid confusion between the new \nand old lists.\n\n\n\u003e\n\u003e *Proposed Cut-Off Date?* Then we also need to agree on a date to cut \n\u003e off the old list.. Their sysadmin said we could have the new list \n\u003e auto-post from the old list for a short while. I wonder how well that \n\u003e works ... if that will result in double posting if people write to the \n\u003e new and CC the old list.. Needs a little research how well it would \n\u003e behave to have both lists operating during a transition period. I \n\u003e think we should announce a cut-off date when posts to the old list is \n\u003e shut off, July 15th, one month from now. Thoughts?\n\n\nI'd say move forward with the new list and subscribe it to the old list. \nThat way the new list starts archiving the messages from here forward. \nThere may be a little bit of a problem if someone joins the new list but \nnot the old list, they may not be able to reply to a message sent to the \nold list? You probably would get a duplicate delivery if doing this, but \nyou could encourage users who have joined the new list to turn off \ndelivery on the old list (this is an option in the mailman settings page).\n\nOnce greater than 50% of the members of the old list are members of the \nnew list, send out an announcement that the old list will be turned into \nread only mode in 3 weeks and to use the new list only after that time. \nThis way you don't have to force use of the new list and a majority \nagreement is required before doing so and a technical leader is not \nrequired to enforce a change without a solid commitment from most of the \nmembers. Right before the old list is shut down, send one final \nannouncement e-mail indicating it is closing and link to the new list \n(so that new subscribers will be aware if they are looking at an archive \nof some kind).\n\n\n\n\n\u003e\n\u003e *Moderators?* Mailman on the new server allows having separate logins \n\u003e for admins and moderators. I think the admins of the old SF project \n\u003e are gavin, jgarzik and sipa... they are kind of busy. Perhaps we \n\u003e should identify known trusted community members who can help with \n\u003e moderation. Usually this is dealing with \"held\" messages that are \n\u003e flagged by the spam filter\n\u003e\n\u003e Warren Togami\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/e4e35a74/attachment.html\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 555 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150615/e4e35a74/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "01df879f8f741b495f3d51ed1b8e951c0fcafc91575594b816468332ea7c50654e03e40f49c1f80d88541c003c6c08ca91eb41393c582faf7f9d232b2805cedf"
}