On Thu, 2020-09-17 at 18:47 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users writes: > > On Thu, 2020-09-17 at 02:34 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > > You don't need to have a title, an @mailman email address, or a commit > bit > > > to do any of that. > > > > > > You just do it. > > > > Exactly! But that is not really what this convo is all about. > > No, that is *all* this conversation is about. You need to persuade us > to give you what you want. If you don't speak to our interests, you > won't get it. > > > You keep taking it into the "end user support" arena, I'm focused > > on product preservation. > > I care very little about product preservation for Mailman 2 (it's > complete subordinate to user service in the sense that it would be a > nice to have if there's zero risk to user support), and you need > *nothing* from us to do it, anyway. > > Pragmatically, users are *all* I care about in the Mailman 2 world. > And I'm quite sure that's what the rest of GNU Mailman (the software > development project) thinks, too. Note well: I am not their elected > representative, but I believe my statements are generally > representative of their beliefs about the user base and their values. > If you think otherwise, get in touch with them off list, since they > aren't posting that I'm full of nonsense on list (ie, maybe they're > just not listening here). > > > There are multiple roles, as you well know, why do you feel I need > > to fit in the role you define for me? > > You don't need to fit into any role in the Mailman project. You have > the code, you have access to Launchpad or Github or Gitlab or > SourceForge, and you have and will have access to this mailing list. > > But if you don't care about users, you're not part of the team. > You're a lone ranger. > > > Who's users? ;-) > > The Mailman Project's users, and in particular subscribers and admins > of Mailman 2 sites and lists. > > > I think, based on this thread, you are going to have a really tough > > time ever retiring from Mailman. > > From "Mailman"? Not even envisioned at present, except in the sense > that I'm old enough to be aware of my own impending death being closer > to me than my birth. > > From *Mailman 2*? No problem at all. This is not my first rodeo, my > friend. You clearly do not understand what I've been saying about the > costs and benefits of user support and why GNU Mailman has chosen the > development and user support strategies we have. > > I'm not saying you should agree. Certainly not that you should > abandon your own interests. But you seem to have a completely > unrealistic idea of how things work in open source and how you could > get at least some of what you want in this particular case. > > > > "Manage just the new features" sounds like a terrible deal for the > > > vast majority of admins and subscribers, and a very bad look for GNU > > > Mailman. > > > Let GNU Mailman, the FSF, and the Mailman community decide that and > > don't prevent them from deciding that. > > Have a clue, Jim. Really. Abhilash, Mark, I, and several others > *are* GNU Mailman -- there's nothing else it *could* be. The FSF has > nothing to do with decisions about what code we distribute, that's not > what GNU is about. The Mailman community is *not* going to be part of > the decision-making process, except that a small, unrepresentative > sample of individual community members post here, and GNU Mailman is > listening to them. And in fact, there will not even be a decision in > some sense. That is, we could lift the feature freeze at any future > date, and then we could reverse that decision afterward. > > As for me preventing anything, I can't prevent anything -- if it's at > all a close call, Abhilash will decide -- and I am not trying to do > so. I am *advocating* that > > 1. the current feature freeze is, on balance, *good* for the community > as a whole even though there's a very vocal group (I take it on > faith that you're not the only one ;-) that wants the freeze > lifted, and > > 2. that lifting the freeze *as proposed on this list* is *not* in the > interest of GNU Mailman or the community > > and I am stating that > > 3. due to my own preferences and constraints, I will retire from > Mailman 2 support if I don't get credible assurances that Mark and > I will get substantial help with user support to offset the likely > increase in needs, and to ensure that user support is maintained at > high levels even as we reduce our commitments as currently planned. >
Stephen, I"m just going to say that your input is always appreciated and welcome, whether you continue to support mm2 or not. Best wishes buddy. -Jim P. ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list -- mailman-users@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to mailman-users-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.python.org/ Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users@python.org/ https://mail.python.org/archives/list/mailman-users@python.org/
