On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 13:40:46 -0500 (EST), Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote > OK, so we need to come to a decision on how Fedora mailing lists will work > as we grow, because we're starting to get requests from various folks to > start them up. > > We've got the following options to consider: > > 1. Continuing to host mailing lists at Red Hat. This is the easiest > option, and considering that Red Hat sponsors lots of mailing lists, no > big deal, really. We've got a good infrastructure for getting them > created relatively quickly. > > 2. Move mailing lists to fedoraproject.org. Other than independence from > redhat.com, what does this buy us? What is this independence from > redhat.com worth? And is Seth even willing/able to maintain this? > > 3. Have mailing lists anywhere and everywhere; whoever wants to set up a > mailing list can set up a mailing list, and we can link them all and note > them as "authoritative project list" or not as we see fit. > > Let's get some answers, and quick. I've got 3 requests for mailing lists > @redhat.com waiting on the burner. > > --g > > _____________________ ____________________________________________ > Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have > Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the > Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the > ] [ dumb. --mcluhan I vote for #2. :) -- Thomas Chung FedoraNEWS.ORG (http://fedoranews.org) "..where you can free your knowledge for your free community!" -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Chung wrote: > On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 13:40:46 -0500 (EST), Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote > >>OK, so we need to come to a decision on how Fedora mailing lists will work >>as we grow, because we're starting to get requests from various folks to >>start them up. >> >>We've got the following options to consider: >> >>1. Continuing to host mailing lists at Red Hat. This is the easiest >>option, and considering that Red Hat sponsors lots of mailing lists, no >>big deal, really. We've got a good infrastructure for getting them >>created relatively quickly. >> >>2. Move mailing lists to fedoraproject.org. Other than independence from >>redhat.com, what does this buy us? What is this independence from >>redhat.com worth? And is Seth even willing/able to maintain this? >> >>3. Have mailing lists anywhere and everywhere; whoever wants to set up a >>mailing list can set up a mailing list, and we can link them all and note >>them as "authoritative project list" or not as we see fit. >> >>Let's get some answers, and quick. I've got 3 requests for mailing lists >>(a)redhat.com waiting on the burner.

On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 08:07 +0100, Gerold Kassube wrote: >also my vote for 2 > > Ok guys, this isn't a vote. This is a probe as to why you would want to use one option over another. A blank vote doesn't help. A well thought out reason would help a lot. Why would you want 2, what makes it the better choice over 1 or 3?

On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 14:39 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Perception is a huge factor in favor of it. Even when we let non > @redhat.com community people to administrate mailing lists, this is not > very visible. Adequate infrastructure and people behind > fedoraproject.org is important to ensure it. The cons are changing what > already works for no "real" advantage. > Is the perception that it ends in a redhat.com address? What if it were lists.fedoraproject.org or something similar, but still ran on RH's hardware? Just playing Devil's Advocate (:

1. Continuing to host mailing lists at Red Hat. This is the easiest option, and considering that Red Hat sponsors lots of mailing lists, no big deal, really. We've got a good infrastructure for getting them created relatively quickly.

2. Move mailing lists to fedoraproject.org. Other than independence from redhat.com, what does this buy us? What is this independence from redhat.com worth? And is Seth even willing/able to maintain this?

3. Have mailing lists anywhere and everywhere; whoever wants to set up a mailing list can set up a mailing list, and we can link them all and note them as "authoritative project list" or not as we see fit.

> 2. Move mailing lists to fedoraproject.org. Other than independence from > redhat.com, what does this buy us? What is this independence from > redhat.com worth? And is Seth even willing/able to maintain this? Seems this would just be a perception thing.

My first instinct is to vote for #2. I like the long-term goal of the Fedora Project becoming more autonomous and independent -- or at least giving that appearance. I know it would take a great deal of effort to move everything over, and I'm not sure we have the resources to do it at this time. Perhaps when there is more muscle behind fedoraproject.org, we can pull this off. I'm willing to go with #1 in the meantime. Something else that we might hear is that a difficult move is best to do now and get it over with, and I would normally agree, but I'm not convinced that we are really in the best position to pull it off right now. How about we go with #1 right now and, if the demand is present, we review this in 6 months?

Remaining @ redhat.com for formal Fedora Web services is like having a Geocities website. OK, that's a little harsh. It just makes it appear that Fedora is forever a stepchild of Red Hat; has to live in the same house, but different last name.

We've got the following options to consider: 1. Continuing to host mailing lists at Red Hat. This is the easiest option, and considering that Red Hat sponsors lots of mailing lists, no big deal, really. We've got a good infrastructure for getting them created relatively quickly. 2. Move mailing lists to fedoraproject.org. Other than independence from redhat.com, what does this buy us? What is this independence from redhat.com worth? And is Seth even willing/able to maintain this? 3. Have mailing lists anywhere and everywhere; whoever wants to set up a mailing list can set up a mailing list, and we can link them all and note them as "authoritative project list" or not as we see fit.