Is there any follow-up to this? Ralph
> On Mar 12, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > 1. That seems fine to me. > 2. Is it possible to do both? I like the idea of annoying the sender but > still allowing the email to be sent. It would cool if it could even add > [list] to the start of the subject line. > 3. This is the main thing that needs to happen. > > Ralph > > > >> On Mar 12, 2017, at 7:49 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Some things: >> >> 1. Archives won't be merged. >> 2. Infra suggests it might be a better idea to have the old email addresses >> respond with a canned reply saying that the lists have moved over to dev@, >> though they can set it up all as aliases if we prefer. >> 3. Current subscribers from all dev lists would be automatically subscribed >> to the combined list. >> >> So, use aliases or have the old addresses bounce back and inform senders to >> use the new list? >> >> On 12 March 2017 at 18:31, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Created a request, not sure if it's public: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-13651 >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-13651> >> >> On 12 March 2017 at 17:11, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >> Yes, >> >> If you could send the request to infra I would appreciate it. >> >> Ralph >> >>> On Mar 12, 2017, at 1:13 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> The vote has been open for 5 days now. Based on the tallies and >>> discussions, it sounds like we'd like to merge the dev lists but keep the >>> user lists as is. Shall we move forward with combining them now? >>> >>> On 10 March 2017 at 12:27, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> Total agreement. >>> >>> On 10 Mar 2017 6:26 p.m., "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >>> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >>> This is exactly why we need one dev list. These last two responses dropped >>> the other lists. This is a horrible way to have discussions that affect >>> all the sub projects. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd love to see more unified configurations in all the subprojects. Gary >>>> mentioned that as an idea for log4cxx as that would make it useful for his >>>> use case where they're using both Java and C++ in various projects. >>>> >>>> While the programming languages in use here (Java, .NET, PHP, and C++) >>>> aren't really compatible with each other, having similar architectures and >>>> plugin systems could help a bit in this regard. Having more inclusive >>>> conversations about this would be great. >>>> >>>> On 10 March 2017 at 04:29, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com >>>> <mailto:mikael.stal...@magine.com>> wrote: >>>> I think that a vast majority of our users only uses one of the languages >>>> we support, and therefore only are interested in one of the subprojects. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> We had once the discussion that we wanted all Apache Logging projects to >>>> become very similar in their usage, starting with the same or a very >>>> similar configuration. Given that we should aim towards one Apache Logging >>>> specification and several Apache Logging specification implementations in >>>> the form of Apache Logging subprojects. That means all the devs for all >>>> subprojects have to talk more. To me this is a good reasons to merge the >>>> dev mailing lists. Further I don't see why the same use case should not >>>> apply to the user mailing lists, too. Those mailing lists see very low >>>> traffic but all of them need a larger audience. Just quoting the last few >>>> messages of two user mailing lists I follow: >>>> >>>> log4j-user: the last topic came in a week ago, the topic before that about >>>> two weeks ago >>>> log4net-user: the last topic came in 24 hours ago and the topic before >>>> that a month ago >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> On 2017-03-09 19:24, Ralph Goers wrote: >>>>> We use general as mainly an announcement list for topics that might be of >>>>> general interest to all logging projects. Generally, these are just >>>>> release announcements. >>>>> >>>>> Ralph >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, I agree that the user lists can remain separate as it doesn't >>>>>> cause any issues currently. The main idea here is whether we should >>>>>> merge the dev lists into one, or if we need a common dev list for all >>>>>> devs to subscribe to (general@ doesn't sound appropriate, but I don't >>>>>> know what that list is for). >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9 March 2017 at 10:26, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >>>>>> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >>>>>> You should note that while we consider all votes only PMC votes are >>>>>> “binding”. I don’t think that changes much however. >>>>>> >>>>>> From a PMC perspective I have to say that keeping the user’s lists >>>>>> separate isn’t likely to be an issue as most of the things that would >>>>>> need to be discussed would be on a dev list anyway. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ralph >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 2:45 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com >>>>>>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The votes are way too scattered over the different mailing lists so >>>>>>> that I didn't even find my own vote. ;-) Therefore I'm trying to >>>>>>> summarize the current state of the vote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ -> >>>>>>> d...@logging.apache.org <mailto:d...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>> Matt Sicker: +1 >>>>>>> Ralph Goers: +1 >>>>>>> Stefan Bodewig: +1 >>>>>>> Sven Rautenverg: -1 >>>>>>> Thorsten Schöning: -0 >>>>>>> Ivan Habunek: -0 >>>>>>> Dominik Psenner: +1 >>>>>>> Remko Popma: +1 >>>>>>> Mikael Ståldal: +0 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Totals so far: >>>>>>> +1: 5 >>>>>>> +0: 1 >>>>>>> -0: 2 >>>>>>> -1: 1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@, general@ -> >>>>>>> u...@logging.apache.org <mailto:u...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Matt Sicker: -1 >>>>>>> Ralph Goers: +1 >>>>>>> Stefan Bodewig: -1 >>>>>>> Sven Rautenverg: -1 >>>>>>> Thorsten Schöning: -0 >>>>>>> Ivan Habunek: -0 >>>>>>> Dominik Psenner: +1 >>>>>>> Remko Popma: +1 >>>>>>> Mikael Ståldal: -1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Totals so far: >>>>>>> +1: 3 >>>>>>> +0: 0 >>>>>>> -0: 2 >>>>>>> -1: 4 >>>>>>> Sorry to anyone who's vote is missing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2017-03-08 05:20, Matt Sicker wrote: >>>>>>>> I may be missing some mailing lists considering I just subscribed to >>>>>>>> half of them less than five minutes ago. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is a vote to merge the various Apache Logging Services mailing >>>>>>>> lists. The proposal is to combine them as follows: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ -> >>>>>>>> d...@logging.apache.org <mailto:d...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>>> log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@, general@ -> >>>>>>>> u...@logging.apache.org <mailto:u...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> commits@ and private@ remain the same as before. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The proposal would also suggest that the old emails become aliases for >>>>>>>> the combined email names so as not to lose any future emails. To >>>>>>>> distinguish between projects, a subject tag can be added such as: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [java] >>>>>>>> [net] >>>>>>>> [cxx] >>>>>>>> [php] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Though I wouldn't think such a tag is required, though it should help >>>>>>>> in gaining the attention of the appropriate audience. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Voting: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1: Yes, combine the mailing lists! >>>>>>>> +0: Go ahead, don't care that much. >>>>>>>> -0: Don't like it, but not vetoing it. >>>>>>>> -1: No, don't do that! I have a better idea! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This vote follows the same "lazy consensus" (at least 3 +1 binding, no >>>>>>>> -1/vetoes) we use for general releases and whatnot. The vote will be >>>>>>>> open for at least 72 hours. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> Mikael Ståldal >>>> Senior software developer >>>> >>>> Magine TV >>>> mikael.stal...@magine.com <mailto:mikael.stal...@magine.com> >>>> Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com >>>> <http://www.magine.com/> >>>> >>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this >>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message >>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not >>>> copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, >>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply >>>> email. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >
