At 12:55 AM 10/22/2003, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote: >Furthermore, I got just "ONE" private mail which said >"please unsubscribe me from announce@" in these 2 months. >-- ONLY "1" --. >(NOTE: previous mail contains "Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]") > >Great! Statistics proved that most of the participants >to announce@apache.org list were welcoming such a newsletter!
It would be nice if this followed, but there is no way to determine which messages users read. If I'm a sysadmin, I won't be unsubscribing from the list no matter how much it annoys me. Many have as few as one outward facing listeners, that one is often 80. Many users should consider this list in their 'crucial' inbox. >Now, I can declare PROUDLY, that >"To those who do not want to receive over 40k mails: please >unsubscribe. Can't you see the procedure of how-to @ the >bottom of each mails?". Tetsuya, I'm very happy with the progress of the newsletter, but I continue to disagree with your assumption and err on the side of those that must limit their saturation. Consider please that you have co-opted the only central resource for information about every security vulnerability announcement stream coming from the ASF. These are ideal messages to take on PDA's, cell phones etc, which in the US and elsewhere remain low-bandwidth devices. Looking at ten commercial vendors mails (RSA, MS, and the like) that I get, including a few news blurbs, I find that all of them are tables of content, containing links to each article. In some cases I'm asked if I would like vanilla text or html flavor. That really is a courtesy, on a dumb device like my older Siemens phone text is much simpler. If MS can be respectful of folks choices, why shouldn't we? I don't see anything unreasonable about an [EMAIL PROTECTED] list if you want to distribute the full document, with the TOC and pointers in the announce@ stream. We can certainly relay other newsworthy bulletins in a news@ channel. If I were not chained to my desk <g> those announcements would be routed to my phone, not my desktop. This argument seems totally bound up in 'Cable/DSL modems make this whole argument moot'. That's not the only email venue. The other argument seems centered around 'your client lets you download or keep messages on the server, filter them, etc - we don't have to do this'. Phones and pda's leave alot to be desired for the sort of filtering that everyone expects in this discussion. announce@ had a very specific semantic. Most projects, if they post change notes in an announcement, filter them to details that users will consider important. Size does matter, and the announce@ list had traditionally provided concise, timely and often critical details. >Furthermore, "If you just want to get the news of httpd *ONLY*, >please subscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Over >17770 subscribers to announce@httpd.apache.org might be >waiting your subscription!" Agreed, if they want to see only their favorite project's releases, this is sage advice. Please do *not* consider requests to respect announce@ bandwidth as a slight against your efforts or your results. The idea and it's execution is fantastic. Thank you for riding the PMCs to get articles to you. Before you stepped up, this was a significant void in the ASF and the only thing that came close was the 'apache' forum on /. Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
