Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 08:46 +0200: > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 06:27:54AM +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 08:07 +0200: > > > +++ releasing.part.html (working copy) > > > @@ -1300,6 +1300,20 @@ Ensure that your mailer doesn't wrap the URLs over > > > <p>NOTE: We announce the release before updating the website since the > > > website > > > update links to the release announcement sent to the announce@ mailing > > > list.</p> > > > > > > +<p>It is possible that your message to the ASF-wide annou...@apache.org > > > will > > > +be rejected. This generates a moderation notification with a Subject line > > > +such as: <tt>Returned post for annou...@apache.org</tt>. > > > > Spell out that this is specifically about announce@a.o, as opposed to > > announce@s.a.o? > > > > > +The originator of such moderation messages is anonymous if the moderator > > > +neglects to sign the moderation message with their own name, which makes > > > it > > > +impossible to have an actual conversation with the moderator. > > > > Mention that a conversation can be had by emailing announce-owner@? > > How about this? >
Seems to cover everything. I took a stab at a slight reorganization; WDYT? — Index: releasing.part.html =================================================================== --- releasing.part.html (revision 1878220) +++ releasing.part.html (working copy) @@ -1300,6 +1300,18 @@ <p>NOTE: We announce the release before updating the website since the website update links to the release announcement sent to the announce@ mailing list.</p> +<p>There are two announce@ mailing lists where the release announcement gets +posted: The Subversion project's annou...@subversion.apache.org list, and the ASF-wide annou...@apache.org +list. It is possible that your message to the ASF-wide announce@ list will be +rejected. This generates a moderation notification with a Subject line such as: +<tt>Returned post for annou...@apache.org</tt>. The moderator who ordered the +mailing list software to reject the message may neglect to sign their name to +the rejection message, making the rejection anonymous, and the grounds for the +rejection may be invalid. Be that as it may, keep calm and forward the +rejection to the dev@ mailing list so the project can discuss whether anything +needs to be done about it. (If necessary, announce@ mailing list moderators can +be contacted via the announce-owner@ handle.)</p> + <p>Update the topics in various Subversion-related IRC channels, such as <tt>#svn</tt> and <tt>#svn-dev</tt> on freenode.</p> > Index: releasing.part.html > =================================================================== > --- releasing.part.html (revision 1878172) > +++ releasing.part.html (working copy) > @@ -1300,6 +1300,23 @@ Ensure that your mailer doesn't wrap the URLs over > <p>NOTE: We announce the release before updating the website since the > website > update links to the release announcement sent to the announce@ mailing > list.</p> > > +<p>There are two announce@ mailing lists where the release announcement gets > +posted: The Subversion project's announce@ list, and the ASF-wide announce@ > +list. It is possible that your message to the ASF-wide announce@ list will > +be rejected. This generates a moderation notification with a Subject line > +such as: <tt>Returned post for annou...@apache.org</tt>. > +The originator of such moderation messages is anonymous if the moderator > +neglects to sign the moderation message with their own name, which makes it > +impossible to have an actual one-on-one conversation with the moderator. > +If you receive such a moderation message please stay calm and forward it to > +Subversion's dev@ mailing list so the project can discuss whether anything > +needs to be done about it. (If necessary, announce@ mailing list moderators > +can be contacted via the announce-owner@ handle.) > +In the past, this moderation mechanism was abused to alert the Subversion > +project about ASF-wide policy changes in the way the KEYS files are supposed I think it's not actually a recent change in policy, but simply a case where we were never in compliance with the letter of the self-styled "policy" in the first place. For example, here's one document from 2011 that describes itself as a "policy" (right at the top, under "Abstract") and describes the KEYS-file-per-PMC practice: https://web.archive.org/web/20110716160744/http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#keys-policy And here's our practice back then: https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201109.mbox/%3CCAJjMeYMcu94n7%3DGSEQ_LLVoPa0acZKPHy-R8sCyZHLpT0AtThw%40mail.gmail.com%3E > +to be handled. This is inappropriate because moderation is supposed to filter > +out spam. Policy changes should be discussed on the dev@ list instead.</p> > + It's unfortunate that this patch is needed. The Foundation should not be something we have to work around. I wish the announce@ moderation policy would change, but until and unless that happens, documenting the issue is the Right Thing. Cheers, Daniel
