Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Mailing lists to discourse migration
On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 04:16:03PM +, Cannata Massimiliano via Discuss wrote: > it is a factual observation that there has been a sensible decline in the > engagement of people in OSGeo... > Not in the conferences presences but in the remote collaboration and > development... This is a very interesting topic and I've been recently advocating opening up access to some infrastructure related git repositories with the specific aim of giving remote collaboration and development more chances (you cannot collaborate in a private repository for sure) --strk; ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Mailing lists to discourse migration
On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 12:46:24PM +0100, Markus Neteler via Discuss wrote: > > With an upgrade from mailman-2 to mailman-3 we could also have a > searchable archive. > See for example > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/ > which looks much more modern than mailman-2 on OSGeo. Unfortunately nobody stepped up to do that. Someone (in Matrix chat!) mentioned he would look at it but never announced any start of work on the SAC mailing list, nor in the SAC chat room. Any proposal remains theoretical until someone takes on the effort of making it real. The corresponding trac ticket is here: - https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/3028 Personally I'd be very happy to see this upgrade coming, but last I checked migration of archives was reported to not be "smooth" (existing mails would not have the same URLs when migrating) so more decisions are to be made (or someone needs to be bold enough to just do it and see what happens, which is what was done with Discourse) --strk; ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Mailing lists to discourse migration
On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 09:56:47AM +0100, Jorge Sanz via Discuss wrote:
> Hi Vicky, allVicky, can you please confirm ...
Just to point out one (only one) of the problems I mentioned in my
previous email about using email over other systems: the mail from
Jorge above arrived to me (and all other subscribers) with a
multipart/mixed Content-Type header. The mixed content was:
1. A multipart/alternative content (created by Jorge Mail User Agent, I guess)
2. A text/plain signature (this was added by Mailman)
The content created by Jorge's MUA (multipart/alternative) had 2
alternatively formatted emails:
1.1. Formatted as text/plain, quoted, utf-8, 10K
1.2. Formatted as text/html, quoted, utf-8, 24K
My mail software is configured to prefer the text/plain flavor, in
these cases, so that's how I read the email. BUT the email is
formatted in an horrible way (to my taste?): the mail body is a single
line with 5178 characters, according to wl(1):
1 803 5178
The HTML version is somewhat more readbable but a question arises:
should Mailman "clean up" the mails received before bouncing them
to all subscribers ? But the bigger question is: WHO (among the
OSGeo members) would be partecipating in such a discussion ? And
what's an effective place to discuss about it ? Also: would picking
a different technology ("Discourse", in this case) facilitate these
choices ?
--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Mailing lists to discourse migration
On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 09:52:35AM +1100, Bruce Bannerman via Discuss wrote:
>Apart from these few emails telling me that a move to something called
>Discourse is happening, I have not seen any discussion on our lists
>explaining the pros and cons of such a move.
>I find this lack of community engagement on this issue to be troubling.
>This does not seem to be a very open source community way of making such a
>significant move.
I feel the same and ask every OSGeo member with responsibility over
infrastructure to use this mailing list more as this is the "place"
with the most foundation members.
The introduction of so many new/different communication channels
resulted in this fragmentation leaving people with this feeling
of being excluded, which is to be avoided.
>Personally, what we have now has been working nicely for me for close on
>20 years.
Same for me. This is something new generations probably consider like
a reason to change (20 years, you oldies!) but I really think email is
still the most open and available and configuratble communication channel
for everyone. I'm 100% sure blind people can read and write email just
fine, and I know first person that I can read and write email even from a
place where internet connection quality is poor, and from machines
which are not very powerful, and I think this is very important if we
want to be inclusive.
>The lists have been very quiet for quite a while now, but that is a
>community engagement issue. It is not something that technology will
>magically fix.
This is only partially true: I've seen a lot of people who are
being very partecipative BUT do not interact on the mailing lists,
even people having responsibilty on the OSGeo infrastructure have been
expressing a form of dislike for mailing lists, for reasons we cannot
pretend not to see.
I for one only very recently finally got back to manage my own email
and I'm seeing again the problems associated with doing so. This does
not mean the same problems do not exist with other systems, but we
should try to understand the needs of our user base and try to help
with providing solutions.
The above said: I'm also disappointed by not seeing partecipation in
the effort which is required to setup a new service (Discourse) from
the very people who loudly asked for it. Let's all please remember
that infrastructures need to be maintained so please don't ask what
OSGeo can do for you ("I want service X") but rather ask what you can
do for OSGeo ("I want to help maintaining service X").
Thank you for reading so far (short messages are also a kind of
technology some prefer to avoid long messages like mine ;)
--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
