* [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list @ 2004-12-25 17:08 Domen Puncer 2004-12-25 17:21 ` Russell King 2004-12-26 16:50 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Domen Puncer @ 2004-12-25 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: rmk; +Cc: lkml If you are subscribed to it, you already know the address. If you are not, you probably don't want bounces. Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <domen@coderock.org> --- c/MAINTAINERS 2004-12-25 15:50:10.000000000 +0100 +++ a/MAINTAINERS 2004-12-25 18:02:02.000000000 +0100 @@ -296,7 +296,6 @@ ARM/PT DIGITAL BOARD PORT P: Stefan Eletzhofer M: stefan.eletzhofer@eletztrick.de -L: linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk W: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ S: Maintained @@ -309,7 +308,6 @@ ARM/STRONGARM110 PORT P: Russell King M: rmk@arm.linux.org.uk -L: linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk W: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ S: Maintained @@ -1788,7 +1786,6 @@ PXA2xx SUPPORT P: Nicolas Pitre M: nico@cam.org -L: linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk S: Maintained QNX4 FILESYSTEM ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2004-12-25 17:08 [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list Domen Puncer @ 2004-12-25 17:21 ` Russell King 2004-12-25 17:34 ` Domen Puncer 2005-01-03 17:54 ` [patch] " Adrian Bunk 2004-12-26 16:50 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2004-12-25 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Domen Puncer; +Cc: lkml On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 06:08:25PM +0100, Domen Puncer wrote: > If you are subscribed to it, you already know the address. If you are not, > you probably don't want bounces. I don't particularly agree with this policy of removing such documentation, especially as I have a good reason to implement such policy on my mailing lists. If we must, I guess it's fine, but I expect *you* to provide the support to people to people who don't know where to go for it if *you* remove this. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2004-12-25 17:21 ` Russell King @ 2004-12-25 17:34 ` Domen Puncer 2005-01-03 17:54 ` [patch] " Adrian Bunk 1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Domen Puncer @ 2004-12-25 17:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: lkml On 25/12/04 17:21 +0000, Russell King wrote: > On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 06:08:25PM +0100, Domen Puncer wrote: > > If you are subscribed to it, you already know the address. If you are not, > > you probably don't want bounces. > > I don't particularly agree with this policy of removing such documentation, > especially as I have a good reason to implement such policy on my mailing > lists. > > If we must, I guess it's fine, but I expect *you* to provide the support > to people to people who don't know where to go for it if *you* remove this. Well... there is webpage URL. How about adding a new flag to MAINTAINERS (ie. "LM", for list-moderated)? Domen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2004-12-25 17:21 ` Russell King 2004-12-25 17:34 ` Domen Puncer @ 2005-01-03 17:54 ` Adrian Bunk 2005-01-03 18:25 ` Russell King ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Adrian Bunk @ 2005-01-03 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Domen Puncer, lkml On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 05:21:55PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 06:08:25PM +0100, Domen Puncer wrote: > > If you are subscribed to it, you already know the address. If you are not, > > you probably don't want bounces. > > I don't particularly agree with this policy of removing such documentation, > especially as I have a good reason to implement such policy on my mailing > lists. > > If we must, I guess it's fine, but I expect *you* to provide the support > to people to people who don't know where to go for it if *you* remove this. I'm sometimes doing patches that cover many files, and I want to Cc the patches to the developers in question. If after sending 10 patches I get 5 "this is a subscribers-only list" mails, I'm not going to subscribe to 5 lists, forward the patches to them and unsubscribe again after this (and repeat this if there's some discussion regarding one of these patches). In my experience, the best solution is a list policy that allows subscribers to post and requires moderator approval for non-members. This policy that is already used by several lists listed in MAINTAINERS is IMHO a good compromise between avoiding spam and allowing non-subscribers to post to the list. cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-03 17:54 ` [patch] " Adrian Bunk @ 2005-01-03 18:25 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 17:33 ` Adrian Bunk 2005-01-04 8:54 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 9:37 ` Miles Bader 2 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2005-01-03 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: Domen Puncer, lkml On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:54:38PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 05:21:55PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > If we must, I guess it's fine, but I expect *you* to provide the support > > to people to people who don't know where to go for it if *you* remove this. > > I'm sometimes doing patches that cover many files, and I want to Cc the > patches to the developers in question. > > If after sending 10 patches I get 5 "this is a subscribers-only list" > mails, I'm not going to subscribe to 5 lists, forward the patches to > them and unsubscribe again after this (and repeat this if there's some > discussion regarding one of these patches). > > In my experience, the best solution is a list policy that allows > subscribers to post and requires moderator approval for non-members. > This policy that is already used by several lists listed in MAINTAINERS > is IMHO a good compromise between avoiding spam and allowing > non-subscribers to post to the list. Well, that's precisely what happens with these lists - your post ends up in the moderator approval queue. They do generally find their way from there into the appropriate peoples mailboxes (iow, mine). -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-03 18:25 ` Russell King @ 2005-01-04 17:33 ` Adrian Bunk 2005-01-05 12:52 ` Horst von Brand 0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Adrian Bunk @ 2005-01-04 17:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Domen Puncer, lkml On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:25:33PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:54:38PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 05:21:55PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > > If we must, I guess it's fine, but I expect *you* to provide the support > > > to people to people who don't know where to go for it if *you* remove this. > > > > I'm sometimes doing patches that cover many files, and I want to Cc the > > patches to the developers in question. > > > > If after sending 10 patches I get 5 "this is a subscribers-only list" > > mails, I'm not going to subscribe to 5 lists, forward the patches to > > them and unsubscribe again after this (and repeat this if there's some > > discussion regarding one of these patches). > > > > In my experience, the best solution is a list policy that allows > > subscribers to post and requires moderator approval for non-members. > > This policy that is already used by several lists listed in MAINTAINERS > > is IMHO a good compromise between avoiding spam and allowing > > non-subscribers to post to the list. > > Well, that's precisely what happens with these lists - your post ends > up in the moderator approval queue. They do generally find their way > from there into the appropriate peoples mailboxes (iow, mine). OK, sorry, my comment was wrong. I confused moderated with subscribers-only . cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 17:33 ` Adrian Bunk @ 2005-01-05 12:52 ` Horst von Brand 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Horst von Brand @ 2005-01-05 12:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: Domen Puncer, lkml Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> said: > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:25:33PM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:54:38PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: [...] > > > In my experience, the best solution is a list policy that allows > > > subscribers to post and requires moderator approval for non-members. > > > This policy that is already used by several lists listed in MAINTAINERS > > > is IMHO a good compromise between avoiding spam and allowing > > > non-subscribers to post to the list. > > Well, that's precisely what happens with these lists - your post ends > > up in the moderator approval queue. They do generally find their way > > from there into the appropriate peoples mailboxes (iow, mine). > OK, sorry, my comment was wrong. > > I confused moderated with subscribers-only . Subscribers-only lists hold messages from non-subscribers for owner approval. She might just axe them (o have them automatically axed), or forward them to the list, or let them sleep for a long time. In any case, none of this is really relevant: Per the laws, if your message is forwarded to the list (automatically or by hand) you must have consented to it being published, and that means extra hassle for the list owner. She might just throw messages away for this reason. Perhaps the best solution would be to add a line consenting to the publication of the message in any lists? Doesn't hurt much... -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-03 17:54 ` [patch] " Adrian Bunk 2005-01-03 18:25 ` Russell King @ 2005-01-04 8:54 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig 2005-01-04 9:08 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 9:37 ` Miles Bader 2 siblings, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Erik Mouw @ 2005-01-04 8:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: Domen Puncer, lkml On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:54:38PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > I'm sometimes doing patches that cover many files, and I want to Cc the > patches to the developers in question. > > If after sending 10 patches I get 5 "this is a subscribers-only list" > mails, I'm not going to subscribe to 5 lists, forward the patches to > them and unsubscribe again after this (and repeat this if there's some > discussion regarding one of these patches). Note that Mailman lists allow you to be subscribed without getting mail from the list (except the monthly notice on mailman day). Erik -- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 8:54 ` Erik Mouw @ 2005-01-04 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig 2005-01-04 9:25 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 9:08 ` Russell King 1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2005-01-04 9:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Erik Mouw; +Cc: Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:54:37AM +0100, Erik Mouw wrote: > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:54:38PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > I'm sometimes doing patches that cover many files, and I want to Cc the > > patches to the developers in question. > > > > If after sending 10 patches I get 5 "this is a subscribers-only list" > > mails, I'm not going to subscribe to 5 lists, forward the patches to > > them and unsubscribe again after this (and repeat this if there's some > > discussion regarding one of these patches). > > Note that Mailman lists allow you to be subscribed without getting mail > from the list (except the monthly notice on mailman day). Which is still totally annoying. I don't want to use some damn web (or even email-based) interface just to send a single mail to some list. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2005-01-04 9:25 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2005-01-04 9:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:00:57AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:54:37AM +0100, Erik Mouw wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:54:38PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > I'm sometimes doing patches that cover many files, and I want to Cc the > > > patches to the developers in question. > > > > > > If after sending 10 patches I get 5 "this is a subscribers-only list" > > > mails, I'm not going to subscribe to 5 lists, forward the patches to > > > them and unsubscribe again after this (and repeat this if there's some > > > discussion regarding one of these patches). > > > > Note that Mailman lists allow you to be subscribed without getting mail > > from the list (except the monthly notice on mailman day). > > Which is still totally annoying. I don't want to use some damn web (or even > email-based) interface just to send a single mail to some list. In that case, you can personally choose not to send mail there anymore. It's completely up to you. No one is forcing you to send email to any address. You may wish to have 100% open communities everywhere, but unfortunately we live in the real world where politicians get to make laws for us, and we have to abide by them. If this means that people have to respect peoples rights to privacy, and inform them when their privacy may not be assured (and not violate that right to privacy without first doing so.) I don't care if you personally agree with that or not. That's not what it's about. It's about taking reasonable steps to cover ones own ass and the communities ass to ensure survival in silly-law environments. In such an environment, there are two options to this: 1. have a moderated mailing list with public archives where non-subscribers are informed that their message can't be accepted because x, y, and z. 2. have an open mailing list with private archives and a method to ensure that there are _no_ archive sites subscribed. (2) is an impossibility, which only leaves (1). Remember - there *are* people who use law as a method to make money. I think that recent events with a certain company in the US prove that point nicely. Think about it. And let me remind you that I don't care whether you agree or not. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 9:25 ` Russell King @ 2005-01-04 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig 2005-01-04 10:19 ` Russell King ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2005-01-04 9:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:25:15AM +0000, Russell King wrote: > In that case, you can personally choose not to send mail there anymore. > It's completely up to you. No one is forcing you to send email to any > address. I don't plan to force anyone to do anything with their mailinglists. But we shouldn't mention lists with stupid policies as maintainer contacts. > You may wish to have 100% open communities everywhere, but unfortunately > we live in the real world where politicians get to make laws for us, and > we have to abide by them. If this means that people have to respect > peoples rights to privacy, and inform them when their privacy may not > be assured (and not violate that right to privacy without first doing > so.) > > I don't care if you personally agree with that or not. That's not what > it's about. It's about taking reasonable steps to cover ones own ass > and the communities ass to ensure survival in silly-law environments. Maybe you should offshore your lists to conuntries with saner laws (or at least to less obedient people..) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2005-01-04 10:19 ` Russell King 2005-01-05 9:20 ` Jes Sorensen 2005-01-04 21:13 ` Lee Revell 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 2 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2005-01-04 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:33:26AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:25:15AM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > In that case, you can personally choose not to send mail there anymore. > > It's completely up to you. No one is forcing you to send email to any > > address. > > I don't plan to force anyone to do anything with their mailinglists. > But we shouldn't mention lists with stupid policies as maintainer contacts. As Alan has already pointed out, there's more to the MAINTAINERS file than just pointing out to main line kernel developers where to send their patches. > > I don't care if you personally agree with that or not. That's not what > > it's about. It's about taking reasonable steps to cover ones own ass > > and the communities ass to ensure survival in silly-law environments. > > Maybe you should offshore your lists to conuntries with saner laws (or > at least to less obedient people..) s/or at least to less obedient people/and offshore the list administrators as well/ People seem rather unwilling to do so because it's a hell of a lot of hastle to look after properly. The suggestion has been made in the past and always comes to nothing. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 10:19 ` Russell King @ 2005-01-05 9:20 ` Jes Sorensen 2005-01-05 14:04 ` Alan Cox 0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Jes Sorensen @ 2005-01-05 9:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml >>>>> "Russell" == Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> writes: Russell> On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:33:26AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig Russell> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:25:15AM +0000, Russell King wrote: > In >> that case, you can personally choose not to send mail there >> anymore. > It's completely up to you. No one is forcing you to >> send email to any > address. >> >> I don't plan to force anyone to do anything with their >> mailinglists. But we shouldn't mention lists with stupid policies >> as maintainer contacts. Russell> As Alan has already pointed out, there's more to the Russell> MAINTAINERS file than just pointing out to main line kernel Russell> developers where to send their patches. Maybe it's time to have an additional entry in MAINTAINERS then - having fscked up lists listed in there equal to sane ones seems completely inappropriate. Requiring broken lists to marked as 'this list is b0rked, use it at your own leisure'. That would save users and developers from having to deal with the side effects of these fscked up lists. Using your own argument, I don't care why a list is fscked, the fact is it's fscked and I don't want to have to waste my time on it. Cheers, Jes ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-05 9:20 ` Jes Sorensen @ 2005-01-05 14:04 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-06 9:20 ` Russell King 0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2005-01-05 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jes Sorensen Cc: Russell King, Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Mer, 2005-01-05 at 09:20, Jes Sorensen wrote: > >>>>> "Russell" == Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> writes: > Maybe it's time to have an additional entry in MAINTAINERS then - > having fscked up lists listed in there equal to sane ones seems > completely inappropriate. We do that for individuals whether they are sane or complete loons 8) I'm in favour of it letting you see if the list is subscription based. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-05 14:04 ` Alan Cox @ 2005-01-06 9:20 ` Russell King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2005-01-06 9:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alan Cox Cc: Jes Sorensen, Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Mer, 2005-01-05 at 09:20, Jes Sorensen wrote: > > >>>>> "Russell" == Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> writes: > > Maybe it's time to have an additional entry in MAINTAINERS then - > > having fscked up lists listed in there equal to sane ones seems > > completely inappropriate. > > We do that for individuals whether they are sane or complete loons 8) > > I'm in favour of it letting you see if the list is subscription based. As am I. It's the "all lists must be open" fundamentalist brigade who are making a mountain out of this mole hill. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig 2005-01-04 10:19 ` Russell King @ 2005-01-04 21:13 ` Lee Revell 2005-01-05 0:07 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 2 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Lee Revell @ 2005-01-04 21:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 09:33 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:25:15AM +0000, Russell King wrote: > > In that case, you can personally choose not to send mail there anymore. > > It's completely up to you. No one is forcing you to send email to any > > address. > > I don't plan to force anyone to do anything with their mailinglists. > But we shouldn't mention lists with stupid policies as maintainer contacts. Agreed. Besides, there are _very_ effective solutions to the spam problem. man spamassassin. Lee ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 21:13 ` Lee Revell @ 2005-01-05 0:07 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-05 1:19 ` Lee Revell 0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2005-01-05 0:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lee Revell; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Maw, 2005-01-04 at 21:13, Lee Revell wrote: > Agreed. Besides, there are _very_ effective solutions to the spam > problem. man spamassassin. You realise current generation spam generator tools actually grab and build spamassassin and then feed the spam through it adjusting it until it passes ? Please don't tell mailing list admins how to run lists. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-05 0:07 ` Alan Cox @ 2005-01-05 1:19 ` Lee Revell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Lee Revell @ 2005-01-05 1:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 00:07 +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Maw, 2005-01-04 at 21:13, Lee Revell wrote: > > Agreed. Besides, there are _very_ effective solutions to the spam > > problem. man spamassassin. > > You realise current generation spam generator tools actually grab and > build spamassassin and then feed the spam through it adjusting it until > it passes ? > > Please don't tell mailing list admins how to run lists. > Apologies for the offtopic post. Lee ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig 2005-01-04 10:19 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 21:13 ` Lee Revell @ 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 2 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2005-01-04 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Maw, 2005-01-04 at 09:33, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Maybe you should offshore your lists to conuntries with saner laws (or > at least to less obedient people..) The european union data protection law prohibits such offshoring ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 8:54 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2005-01-04 9:08 ` Russell King 1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Russell King @ 2005-01-04 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Erik Mouw; +Cc: Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:54:37AM +0100, Erik Mouw wrote: > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:54:38PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > I'm sometimes doing patches that cover many files, and I want to Cc the > > patches to the developers in question. > > > > If after sending 10 patches I get 5 "this is a subscribers-only list" > > mails, I'm not going to subscribe to 5 lists, forward the patches to > > them and unsubscribe again after this (and repeat this if there's some > > discussion regarding one of these patches). > > Note that Mailman lists allow you to be subscribed without getting mail > from the list (except the monthly notice on mailman day). Which you can also turn off. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 PCMCIA - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/ 2.6 Serial core ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-03 17:54 ` [patch] " Adrian Bunk 2005-01-03 18:25 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 8:54 ` Erik Mouw @ 2005-01-04 9:37 ` Miles Bader 2005-01-04 9:48 ` Dave Airlie 2005-01-04 10:18 ` Erik Mouw 2 siblings, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-01-04 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: Domen Puncer, lkml Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> writes: > In my experience, the best solution is a list policy that allows > subscribers to post and requires moderator approval for non-members. > This policy that is already used by several lists listed in MAINTAINERS > is IMHO a good compromise between avoiding spam and allowing > non-subscribers to post to the list. Sounds great, but _every single time_ I've ever gotten one of those "your message is awaiting moderation" messages from such a list, it's inevitably followed a few hours/days later by a "your message has been rejected" message. In every case, the message I sent was definitely a no-brainer to allow, so I can only guess that either the moderation system is broken, or the moderators are. Are there actually any lists out there where this mechanism works properly? As it is, it's even more annoying than an immediate rejection. -miles -- /\ /\ (^.^) (")") *This is the cute kitty virus, please copy it into your sig so it can spread. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 9:37 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-01-04 9:48 ` Dave Airlie 2005-01-04 10:18 ` Erik Mouw 1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Dave Airlie @ 2005-01-04 9:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Miles Bader; +Cc: Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml > > Are there actually any lists out there where this mechanism works properly? the dri-devel list moderators seem to get it right, I haven't put my address in the moderator e-mail, and we still get things like Adrians patches through to the list.... Dave. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 9:37 ` Miles Bader 2005-01-04 9:48 ` Dave Airlie @ 2005-01-04 10:18 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 13:05 ` Miles Bader 2005-01-09 20:26 ` Pavel Machek 1 sibling, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Erik Mouw @ 2005-01-04 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Miles Bader; +Cc: Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml, Russell King On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 06:37:01PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Sounds great, but _every single time_ I've ever gotten one of those > "your message is awaiting moderation" messages from such a list, it's > inevitably followed a few hours/days later by a "your message has been > rejected" message. In every case, the message I sent was definitely a > no-brainer to allow, so I can only guess that either the moderation > system is broken, or the moderators are. It's not about sanity, it's about abiding the law (the UK Data Protection Act, in this particular case). As Russell King explained in this thread, there are such things as real life and politicians that make privacy laws. On the linux-arm* lists, we make no difference in intention: if you're not subscribed, it means you didn't agree to your messages being publicly archived (i.e.: you didn't agree to your privacy being violated), and to avoid legal hassles later on, we can't accept your post. The legal hassles I'm talking about are not a theoretical thing, there have been successful requests from posters to have their messages removed from other mailing lists archives in the past. Yes, I know that's stupid, and yes, I know a mailing list maintainer can't do anything against other people archiving his list, but the law says otherwise. Note however, that messages with patches sent to the linux-arm-kernel list will get to the right person (i.e.: Russell). Erik linux-arm*-owner #2 -- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 10:18 ` Erik Mouw @ 2005-01-04 13:05 ` Miles Bader 2005-01-04 13:37 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-09 20:26 ` Pavel Machek 1 sibling, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-01-04 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Erik Mouw; +Cc: Miles Bader, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml, Russell King > > Sounds great, but _every single time_ I've ever gotten one of those > > "your message is awaiting moderation" messages from such a list, it's > > inevitably followed a few hours/days later by a "your message has been > > rejected" message. In every case, the message I sent was definitely a > > no-brainer to allow, so I can only guess that either the moderation > > system is broken, or the moderators are. > > It's not about sanity, it's about abiding the law (the UK Data > Protection Act, in this particular case). As Russell King explained in > this thread, there are such things as real life and politicians that > make privacy laws. I've had this problem with many mailing lists not based in the UK, so presumably that particular stupidity doesn't apply to them. However sad the case of the arm lists, I'd like to know if there are more basic problems involved that could explain my experience. It sounds like it would be an excellent idea not to host lists in the UK though... -Miles ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 13:05 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-01-04 13:37 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Erik Mouw @ 2005-01-04 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: snogglethorpe, miles; +Cc: Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml, Russell King On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:05:20PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > > It's not about sanity, it's about abiding the law (the UK Data > > Protection Act, in this particular case). As Russell King explained in > > this thread, there are such things as real life and politicians that > > make privacy laws. > > I've had this problem with many mailing lists not based in the UK, so > presumably that particular stupidity doesn't apply to them. However > sad the case of the arm lists, I'd like to know if there are more > basic problems involved that could explain my experience. The Data Protection Act is the UK implementation of a European Union directive. All EU member states (should) have similar laws. > It sounds like it would be an excellent idea not to host lists in the > UK though... s/UK/EU/. Like Russell already said: so far nobody volunteered to host all EU lists plus their administrators off shore, so we have to live with it. Erik -- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 13:05 ` Miles Bader 2005-01-04 13:37 ` Erik Mouw @ 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2005-01-04 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: snogglethorpe, miles Cc: Erik Mouw, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml, Russell King On Maw, 2005-01-04 at 13:05, Miles Bader wrote: > It sounds like it would be an excellent idea not to host lists in the > UK though... Its an EU wide thing, and various other countries (and I believe some US states). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2005-01-04 10:18 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 13:05 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-01-09 20:26 ` Pavel Machek 1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Pavel Machek @ 2005-01-09 20:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Erik Mouw; +Cc: Miles Bader, Adrian Bunk, Domen Puncer, lkml, Russell King Hi! > > Sounds great, but _every single time_ I've ever gotten one of those > > "your message is awaiting moderation" messages from such a list, it's > > inevitably followed a few hours/days later by a "your message has been > > rejected" message. In every case, the message I sent was definitely a > > no-brainer to allow, so I can only guess that either the moderation > > system is broken, or the moderators are. > > It's not about sanity, it's about abiding the law (the UK Data > Protection Act, in this particular case). As Russell King explained in > this thread, there are such things as real life and politicians that > make privacy laws. > > On the linux-arm* lists, we make no difference in intention: if you're > not subscribed, it means you didn't agree to your messages being > publicly archived (i.e.: you didn't agree to your privacy being > violated), and to avoid legal hassles later on, we can't accept your > post. > > The legal hassles I'm talking about are not a theoretical thing, there > have been successful requests from posters to have their messages > removed from other mailing lists archives in the past. Yes, I know > that's stupid, and yes, I know a mailing list maintainer can't do > anything against other people archiving his list, but the law says > otherwise. What about allowing all messages with X-Okay-to-archive: yes header even without subscription? Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list 2004-12-25 17:08 [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list Domen Puncer 2004-12-25 17:21 ` Russell King @ 2004-12-26 16:50 ` Alan Cox 1 sibling, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Alan Cox @ 2004-12-26 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Domen Puncer; +Cc: rmk, lkml On Sad, 2004-12-25 at 17:08, Domen Puncer wrote: > If you are subscribed to it, you already know the address. If you are not, > you probably don't want bounces. If you are not you want to know where it is so you can subscribe. This patch should not be applied IMHO. Alan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-01-09 20:31 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2004-12-25 17:08 [patch] maintainers: remove moderated arm list Domen Puncer 2004-12-25 17:21 ` Russell King 2004-12-25 17:34 ` Domen Puncer 2005-01-03 17:54 ` [patch] " Adrian Bunk 2005-01-03 18:25 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 17:33 ` Adrian Bunk 2005-01-05 12:52 ` Horst von Brand 2005-01-04 8:54 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig 2005-01-04 9:25 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig 2005-01-04 10:19 ` Russell King 2005-01-05 9:20 ` Jes Sorensen 2005-01-05 14:04 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-06 9:20 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 21:13 ` Lee Revell 2005-01-05 0:07 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-05 1:19 ` Lee Revell 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-04 9:08 ` Russell King 2005-01-04 9:37 ` Miles Bader 2005-01-04 9:48 ` Dave Airlie 2005-01-04 10:18 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 13:05 ` Miles Bader 2005-01-04 13:37 ` Erik Mouw 2005-01-04 22:03 ` Alan Cox 2005-01-09 20:26 ` Pavel Machek 2004-12-26 16:50 ` Alan Cox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).