On Sun, 3 May 2009, Jim Grisanzio wrote: > On 05/02/09 10:39, Valerie Bubb Fenwick wrote: >> On Fri, 1 May 2009, Bonnie Corwin wrote: >>> The core-contrib-discuss email is generated automatically from the >>> registration database. >>> >>> I think the problem with your email might be that you changed your list >>> subscriptions but not the email address in your profile which is what this >>> list would pick up. Or if you did update your profile, it didn't get >>> picked up because the list isn't re-generated on an ongoing basis at the >>> moment. >> My email addr is correct in the profile, but I might not have >> updated until after the list was last generated. >>> If the OGB wants to use this list on an ongoing basis, that's fine. In >>> the past, it has only been used at election time - hence the message. If >>> you want to use it on an ongoing basis, you just need to let the tonic-ops >>> team know that so they can set up a cron job to re-generate the list at >>> least once a day to pick up changes in status on a regular basis. >> My impression was that we wanted to do more outreach via this alias >> at more than just election time, but I'll let some of the other >> OGB members pipe up (and since it's Friday night, I imagine most >> are off line ;) >> > > hey ... > > I don't the OGB policy mail went through to core-contrib-discuss. The last > mail I got from core-contrib-discus is on March 28 (mine, actually). Also, a > CC in Advocacy (Max Bruning) said he didn't get the mail on > core-contrib-discuss either after I forwarded the thread to advocacy-discuss. > So, I sent a test message to core-contrib-discuss and it bounced with the > following message (which is different from Valerie's bounce): > > ----- > This list is only in use during the OGB elections period. If you > have a comment or question regarding OpenSolaris governance or your current > contributor status, please use ogb-discuss. > -----
I actually got both bounces :) The first one was based on sending from the wrong email addr - a simple switch of that field in the header, and then I got the second bounce (which is what started the conversation with Bonnie on the use of the alias) > > So, I don't think core-contrib-discuss is live at the moment. it's not :( > In general, core-contrib-discuss has not been a popular or frequently used > list, and I think most community Members will balk at the notion of using it > for communications from the OGB on an ongoing basis -- which is an idea I > pitched many times before but got shot down just as many times so I gave up > on it entirely. > > The constitution already outlines a clear mechanism to disseminate > information to the community from the OGB, and that's the Facilitators the > OGB is supposed to appoint to each CG. That, too, has been somewhat unpopular Unfortunately, though, there is no official list of facilitators. Michelle has just started an alias for them, but we have a lot more groups than we have members of that alias :) > in the past, but I think Michelle's new project will go a long way to solving > that problem for the OGB. By the way, as a Member of the community, I'm fine > with core-contrib-discuss being used as a communications mechanism from the > OGB. I think the list should be renamed to members at opensolaris.org, and it > should be moderated by the OGB secretary for low traffic and critical > information delivered to the Membership that the Facilitators can then > support in the field. It shouldn't be a discussion alias. We already have > ogb-discus for that. I agree with John that this is a good idea and worth further discussion. Valerie -- Valerie Fenwick, http://blogs.sun.com/bubbva Solaris Security Technologies, Developer, Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, Menlo Park, CA, 94025.
