Hi Laurent - In case you didn't stay logged into IRC, here was my response to your question: <bubbva> So, I am not sure how much, if any, view, the current OGB had in this decision (I'm assuming none). That is probably part of the problem - when these things happen without consulting the OGB, it's impossible for them to register any thoughts on it. <bubbva> On the first case of the @sun.com addresses being whitelisted, I'm not against the idea of that, but do believe it should've been discussed in the open on website-discuss before the change happened. <bubbva> that would've been the perfect opportunity for folks to suggest also whitelisting addresses like @opensolaris.org, and a compromise could've been reached. * kupfer (n=kup...@nat/sun/x-294a88d65bf0bace) has joined #opensolaris-meeting <bubbva> I don't like how this decision was made with lack of notification to the community. You shouldn't have had to find out by trial & error. <bubbva> I agree with lblume that it is not that hard to subscribe to these aliases, so I don't think the barrier to entry is high enough to warrant whitelisting. <bubbva> Now the "bounce" messages from mailman when you aren't subscribed don't look like traditional bounces and I know I've missed them recently, so those could probably be improved. <bubbva> On the topic of losing administrative rights to your alias: this is the first I've heard of it. I would like to hear more about why this was done - I know the site has been having problems, so I don't know if this is just part of the investigation into that. <bubbva> still, the decision to do this, even if only temporarily, should've been discussed with the community, in my opinion.
Sorry for the formatting - it looked better in IRC :) Valerie -- Valerie Fenwick, http://blogs.sun.com/bubbva Solaris Security Technologies, Developer, Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, Menlo Park, CA, 94025. _______________________________________________ website-discuss mailing list [email protected]
