On 12-04-03 11:08 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
So David's program can't be *part* of GNU Mailman without special permission, which I doubt the GNU Project (ie, RMS, AFAIK) will grant (and would require delicate negotations in extreme good humor on our part, based on past experience trying to negotiate licensing exceptions with RMS). It is not obvious that it can't be bundled with Mailman distributions, however.
It occurs to me that it's perfectly reasonable to assume that people who *package* mailman for different distributions may choose different recommended/required archive software, since they can (and with the license hassle likely should)) be separate packages. So what works for the FSF, what works for us as a dev team, and what works for the distributions may actually be different things. So no matter what, having David release his work is potentially going to lead to people getting it as a default, somewhere along the line, if he's got a great solution available.
People get something better than pipermail *and* it doesn't result in me getting more angry emails from RMS? Sounds like a winner to me.
BTW, I *will* argue that we should have a bundled archiver that does something more than make mbox files, and you can all expect to have a big argument with me about it later. ;) But I'm not in a hurry to make a decision about which one Right Now because I'm going to want to do a deeper usability analysis of Postorius + archive and I can't do that until we have them both on the table for user testing.
Terri _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
