At 11:41 AM -0400 7/28/00, Werner Reisberger is rumored to have typed:
I never saw any admin reply to the numerous complains about spam messages.
Actually, that's not _strictly_ true, since I remember when Stephen was actually maintaining the list (and probably anally have archives of the list from that time somewhere on some floppy or MO cart from a long time ago and far far away). But you're right, it's been _years_ since he's been around.
However, the list belongs to the maintainer (or at least the machine's admin), not the members. You'll get no argument from me that the list should be moved (I believe I said exactly that a couple of times), but to suggest the admins need to take a poll to ask what they may or may not do with the existing list is silly, to say the least. They are certainly able to move this list to mailman without the list subscriber's permission - indeed, they _have_ done so, which makes my point for me.
Whether we should move this list to a SmartList server is a completely seperate issue...one which Philip should probably weigh in on, since he is now maintaining the procmail/SmartList source and as such the de facto head of our band of merry wanderers...
Charlie
Charlie Summers charlie@lofcom.com writes: ...
However, the list belongs to the maintainer (or at least the machine's admin), not the members. You'll get no argument from me that the list should be moved (I believe I said exactly that a couple of times), but to suggest the admins need to take a poll to ask what they may or may not do with the existing list is silly, to say the least. They are certainly able to move this list to mailman without the list subscriber's permission - indeed, they _have_ done so, which makes my point for me.
If the goal is to maximize the quality of the list, polling the subscribers _may_ provide useful information in making a decision on how to proceed. Other constraints may make the opinions of the list participants moot. I would assume that the flimsiness of the current connection between SmartList and RWTH-Aachen means that in the list of priorities for the admin at RWTH-Aachen, the happiness of the list members is much less important than the effort/time required. As the lead sysadmin at an academic institution, I'll opine that this is how it should be.
Whether we should move this list to a SmartList server is a completely seperate issue...one which Philip should probably weigh in on, since he is now maintaining the procmail/SmartList source and as such the de facto head of our band of merry wanderers...
The maintainer is not the leader. The job of maintainer is to express the concensus desire in a machine readable form. For those with parlimentary body experience, "Chairman of the standing committee for development" would probably be a better analogue for my position. Hmm, perhaps that should be "Chairman-at-large" given that I'll be moving in less than a month...
Anyway, I don't really care what software is used to run this list: the list is just a tool. Heck, the earliest versions of the Linux C library were developed by H. J. Lu on a Dec Alpha running OSF and cross-compiled for the i386. Whatever gets the job done. I think this says more about the community of smartlist users and how that community developed than it does about smartlist itself.
As for moving this list, I can tell you what it'll take:
0) you volunteer and let the list know that you're going to go for it. Having the support of the list would be a Good Thing. 1) you set up the server. 2) you email Stephen, wait a couple days, then call him, asking for his support. In particular, he'll need to be willing to: a) forward smartlist-users@procmail.org to your address, and b) vouch for you to the Aachen admins 3) you email or call the admins at RWTH-Aachen and ask that they send you the current subscribers list. Suggest that they call Stephen to confirm your legitimacy. 4) once you have your list populated, you talk to the Aachen admins again and schedule the changeover. They'll need to send you any last minute changes to the subscribers list, then set smartlist@lists.rwth-aachen.de to be forwarded to your address.
Volunteers?
Philip Guenther
At 11:01 PM -0400 8/16/00, Philip Guenther is rumored to have typed:
The maintainer is not the leader. The job of maintainer is to express the concensus desire in a machine readable form.
Since you appear to be doing the bulk of the coding, you are indeed the "leader," whether you necessarily want to be or not. It was the _lack_ of leadership is what got us into this mess in the first place. (I am _not_ picking on Stephen here. The _only_ gripe I have with him is that he didn't secure the future of the code and the lists before he moved on; I remember the long period where _no one,_ including you, was really in charge of the code. I do _not_ fault him for moving on to other projects at all, I simply wish he would have spent 20-minutes or so properly closing things down and transfering those responsibilities necessary.)
Anyway, I don't really care what software is used to run this list
Personally, I don't, either. But look at it from the newbie's perspective; "I want to install and use SmartList...but gee, the people who run the SmartList support list don't even trust it to operate their _own_ list!"
Exactly what does that say about SmartList to the newbie?
As for moving this list, I can tell you what it'll take:
Personally, I disagree completely. What it _should_ take is:
1) Someone volunteers, and is annointed by you to operate the list. (Consider this a volunteer, although there are others more capable than I to operate the list.)
2) Stephen transfers the dist lists he _should_ have passed on to someone who would properly maintain them a long time ago, and redirects the forwards. Or better, transfers the domain to you to be quit of it.
3) RWTH-Aachen.DE closes down the lists they don't want to run anyway...or don't, since these lists will rapidly become irrelevant anyway.
Much simpler than your method, which involves asking people for permission to do something they shouldn't be grantint permission for, anyway. Bottom line, RWTH-Aachen.DE doesn't have _any_ connection to SmartList or procmail anymore, and shouldn't be operating the lists. Unless, of course, you _want_ them to; again, like it or not, you _are_ the one who should make these decisions. (It is impossible for committees to come to _any_ rapid agreements, and it's equally impossible for hundreds of mailing list subscribers to do so. And to think otherwise is foolish.) If _you_ choose to have them operate them, fine..but they have absolutely no connection to the software packages anymore. Heck, they don't even use 'em.
Charlie
Charlie Summers charlie@lofcom.com writes:
At 11:01 PM -0400 8/16/00, Philip Guenther is rumored to have typed:
The maintainer is not the leader. The job of maintainer is to express the concensus desire in a machine readable form.
Since you appear to be doing the bulk of the coding, you are indeed the "leader," whether you necessarily want to be or not. It was the _lack_ of leadership is what got us into this mess in the first place. (I am _not_ picking on Stephen here. The _only_ gripe I have with him is that he didn't secure the future of the code and the lists before he moved on; I remember the long period where _no one,_ including you, was really in charge of the code. I do _not_ fault him for moving on to other projects at all, I simply wish he would have spent 20-minutes or so properly closing things down and transfering those responsibilities necessary.)
This is where I see what happened as telling about the procmail & SmartList communities: who was there to take on maintainence of either of these packages? How many people at that point had submitted more than one patch or chunk of code to either procmail or SmartList? The list at the bottom the README file would seem to indicate that you could count those people on one hand, and that's still true today. To ensure stability, that number should probably be greater than 20, with at least a handfull (not one!) having write access to the source. It appears that the SmartList and procmail communities are too small, too content, too busy, or too inexperienced to _sustain_ Open Source development. Until those conditions disappear, procmail and SmartList will be in danger of becoming unmaintained. The status of the lists is just a reflection of this.
Anyway, I don't really care what software is used to run this list
Personally, I don't, either. But look at it from the newbie's perspective; "I want to install and use SmartList...but gee, the people who run the SmartList support list don't even trust it to operate their _own_ list!"
Exactly what does that say about SmartList to the newbie?
That the SmartList community is too small, too disinterested, too busy, or too powerless to change it. Guess what: it's *true*!
As for moving this list, I can tell you what it'll take:
Personally, I disagree completely. What it _should_ take is:
- Someone volunteers, and is annointed by you to operate the list.
(Consider this a volunteer, although there are others more capable than I to operate the list.)
- Stephen transfers the dist lists he _should_ have passed on to someone
who would properly maintain them a long time ago, and redirects the forwards. Or better, transfers the domain to you to be quit of it.
- RWTH-Aachen.DE closes down the lists they don't want to run anyway...or
don't, since these lists will rapidly become irrelevant anyway.
Much simpler than your method, which involves asking people for permission to do something they shouldn't be grantint permission for, anyway. Bottom line, RWTH-Aachen.DE doesn't have _any_ connection to SmartList or procmailn anymore, and shouldn't be operating the lists. Unless, of course, you _want_
Wrong: RWTH-Aachen does have a connection in the form of many, many copies of procmail and SmartList that tell people to send their questions to mailing-lists whose domain part is "rwth-aachen.de". That's why RWTH-Aachen has to be involved: otherwise a community that's too small already will be made even smaller.
them to; again, like it or not, you _are_ the one who should make these decisions. (It is impossible for committees to come to _any_ rapid agreements, and it's equally impossible for hundreds of mailing list subscribers to do so. And to think otherwise is foolish.)
...
Who said anything about the list subscribers deciding something together? I said the volunteer would ideally be _supported_ by the list, not that her or she should be selected by the list. The selection is done by the volunter himself or herself when they start looking at what the setup would require, whether they have the knowledge and time to do it, etc. When the volunteer makes the effort to have the lists transfered to their control, then it will be decided.
Note that this could just as well be done by a group of people, but even then it must, in the end, be self-driven.
Philip Guenther
Quoting guenther+smartlist@gac.edu:
This is where I see what happened as telling about the procmail & SmartList communities: who was there to take on maintainence of either of these packages? How many people at that point had submitted more than one patch or chunk of code to either procmail or SmartList? The list at the bottom the README file would seem to indicate that you
could
I wrote some addons (confirmation, remote administration) for SmartList but found it difficult to participate in the development. E.g. although I sent several emails to you with a small patch for x_command it isn't included in the latest SL release. I also wasn't sure if addons would be considered at all.
Together with Peter Hartzler I wrote a new SL FAQ. I couldn't found any word about it in the latest SL package. It's mentioned on procmail.org but not in the package. I think it wouldn't be bad to include a FAQ into the package.
count those people on one hand, and that's still true today. To ensure stability, that number should probably be greater than 20, with at
least
I don't think that the requirement for open software development is a certain number of active people. There are very successful projects with only a handful people.
a handfull (not one!) having write access to the source. It appears that the SmartList and procmail communities are too small, too content, too busy, or too inexperienced to _sustain_ Open Source development. Until those conditions disappear, procmail and SmartList will be in danger of becoming unmaintained. The status of the lists is just a reflection of this.
I don't think that the SmartList and procmail communities are too small. A lot of people are using this tools without problems. They are only users, satisfied with the features of Procmail and SL and have no demands to join the mailing lists or to improve the code.
That the SmartList community is too small, too disinterested, too busy, or too powerless to change it. Guess what: it's *true*!
I think it's a strength of the SL community (or family?) to stay on the SL list although it was flooded with spam ;)
To ensure the future of Procmail/SmartList I could contribute the following:
- Running and maintaining the SL mailing list (with Smartlist) - searchable Webarchive for the SL list - (web)CVS for Procmail and SL packages
Implementation within 2 weeks
Since my internet connectivity isn't the best and because of time restraints I wouldn't act as a primary ftp site for packages and wouldn't run the procmail list.
That's just a proposal. If someone else has better facilities I will be happy.
Werner
This is from the SmartList list originally. I'm crossposting this intriguing discussion to both lists for the time being; I suppose this really could move to procmail-dev properly (nobody complained when I proposed to use that list for discussions like this). Thus, I also include procmail-dev, and direct followups there.
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 02:35:17 -0500, guenther+smartlist@gac.edu wrote:
Charlie Summers charlie@lofcom.com writes:
At 11:01 PM -0400 8/16/00, Philip Guenther is rumored to have typed:
The maintainer is not the leader. The job of maintainer is to express the concensus desire in a machine readable form.
Since you appear to be doing the bulk of the coding, you are indeed the "leader," whether you necessarily want to be or not.
This is where I see what happened as telling about the procmail & SmartList communities: who was there to take on maintainence of either of these packages? How many people at that point had submitted more than one patch or chunk of code to either procmail or SmartList?
I think this could be fixed. If you look at some of the people on the SmartList list, they have already contributed stuff which would at a minimum be suitable for inclusion in the distribution as a contrib/ "use at your own risk" directory or something. It was never sent in for consideration (as far as I know) but work has been done, and some of it really should be included in one form or another (subscriber verification for SmartList, for example -- it should be standard and turned on by default!)
What this operation truly lacks is coordination. Some of the blame falls on me; I'm listed as something like "volunteer coordinator" in the README file -- but nobody ever really asked me if I would accept that title or role (although in some ways it was implicit).
Anyway, I'm willing to take up that challenge, in principle, but right now I'm probably too overloaded with "real work" to be able to contribute anything meaningful.
I think we should have another IRC chat with Stephen and the other folks who originally were interested in the procmail.org idea, perhaps in early September. I can volunteer to write up an agenda, based on earlier messages in this thread. I can also call Stephen and ask him what day and time would be suitable (or Philip, if you're going to call him anyway at some point, can you bring this up?)
I'll try to monitor these lists a little bit more actively over the next few weeks, but it would help me keep focused if there would be "procmail.org" in the Subject line of everything pertaining to this.
The list at the bottom the README file would seem to indicate that you could count those people on one hand, and that's still true today. To ensure stability, that number should probably be greater than 20, with at least a handfull (not one!) having write access to the source.
I'd be in favor of giving Whom It May Concern some sort of write access, and see what comes of it. If (whoever will be running) procmail.org is not willing to put up an Anon CVS server, it can be moved to sourceforge.net or something.
The "official" releases would of course have to be coordinated and controlled but right now, I think I would personally at least see a more straightforward way to send in patches and have people try them out on their own risk.
It appears that the SmartList and procmail communities are too small, too content, too busy, or too inexperienced to _sustain_ Open Source development. Until those conditions disappear, procmail and SmartList will be in danger of becoming unmaintained. The status of the lists is just a reflection of this.
With better planning, you can do wonders. The problem is, planning is boring and "eats up" enthusiasm. But I think a good agenda and some shared goals would be a way to get this thing started again. If you can see others contribute, you will have more incentive to send in your own little suggestion, too. Bootstrapping this process -- finding and coaching the first contributors -- is perhaps not "fun" but it can lead to more and better fun down the road. :-)
/* era */
At 4:13 AM -0400 8/17/00, era eriksson is rumored to have typed:
I think we should have another IRC chat with Stephen and the other folks who originally were interested in the procmail.org idea, perhaps in early September. I can volunteer to write up an agenda, based on earlier messages in this thread. I can also call Stephen and ask him what day and time would be suitable (or Philip, if you're going to call him anyway at some point, can you bring this up?)
Don't take this personally, please, but this is _exactly_ the kind of nonsense that happens when a committee attempts to do anything. Darnitall, one person should be making the decisions for the future direction of procmail/SmartList, so that things could actually be _done._
I mean, look at this; you're now talking about holding an IRC chat, sometime in September, with an adenda to be written (and possibly voted upon before the first meeting) no less, when all that reall needs to be done is for Stephen to admit he is no longer interested in any of this, give it over completely to Phillip, and then Phillip make any decisions he sees fit for the future of the software packages and the mailing lists. (Again, if he chooses to leave them where they are, that's fine. But he should simply decide and move on. Not us, him.)
What you proppose consists of spending _months_ spinning wheels and accomplishing _nothing,_ where what I propose takes about 20-minutes and simply accepts the reality of the situation. A committee simply CANNOT deal with software development, and to pretend otherwise does nothing but validates the Microsoft model.
I'm sorry, kids, but procmail and SmartList are not major software projects - they can (and should, and indeed MUST) be maintained by ONE PERSON, who accepts or rejects the bug fixes/feature requests of the users at his discression, and who understands the internals of the code - I certainly am not qualified, and I'm betting there isn't much of anyoine other than Phillip who is. (And if you don't like the direction he is going, the source is open and you are welcomed to alter it to your heart's content.)
Turning this into a committee simply bogs down the software in unnecessary nonsense.
Charlie
I agree with Charlie. There should be one maintainer who calls all the shots. I'm not too familiar with what's going on here with the politics of procmail and smartlist -- I just use them. I don't even know who Stephen is and how he fits in.
But I do know that I don't want procmail and smartlist to disappear. I can help him out if Philip wants to take over, either with hosting, paying for hosting, maintaining, etc.
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Charlie Summers wrote:
At 4:13 AM -0400 8/17/00, era eriksson is rumored to have typed:
I think we should have another IRC chat with Stephen and the other folks who originally were interested in the procmail.org idea, perhaps in early September. I can volunteer to write up an agenda, based on earlier messages in this thread. I can also call Stephen and ask him what day and time would be suitable (or Philip, if you're going to call him anyway at some point, can you bring this up?)
Don't take this personally, please, but this is _exactly_ the kind of nonsense that happens when a committee attempts to do anything. Darnitall, one person should be making the decisions for the future direction of procmail/SmartList, so that things could actually be _done._
I mean, look at this; you're now talking about holding an IRC chat, sometime in September, with an adenda to be written (and possibly voted upon before the first meeting) no less, when all that reall needs to be done is for Stephen to admit he is no longer interested in any of this, give it over completely to Phillip, and then Phillip make any decisions he sees fit for the future of the software packages and the mailing lists. (Again, if he chooses to leave them where they are, that's fine. But he should simply decide and move on. Not us, him.)
What you proppose consists of spending _months_ spinning wheels and accomplishing _nothing,_ where what I propose takes about 20-minutes and simply accepts the reality of the situation. A committee simply CANNOT deal with software development, and to pretend otherwise does nothing but validates the Microsoft model.
I'm sorry, kids, but procmail and SmartList are not major software projects - they can (and should, and indeed MUST) be maintained by ONE PERSON, who accepts or rejects the bug fixes/feature requests of the users at his discression, and who understands the internals of the code - I certainly am not qualified, and I'm betting there isn't much of anyoine other than Phillip who is. (And if you don't like the direction he is going, the source is open and you are welcomed to alter it to your heart's content.)
Turning this into a committee simply bogs down the software in unnecessary nonsense.
Charlie
Smartlist mailing list Smartlist@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/smartlist
On Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:51:37 -0700 (PDT), Matt Dunford matt@stary.zoomedia.com wrote:
I agree with Charlie. There should be one maintainer who calls all the shots. I'm not too familiar with what's going on here with the politics of procmail and smartlist -- I just use them. I don't even know who Stephen is and how he fits in.
Two steps back. Historical overview: Stephen is the original author. Philip took over a year ago after an IRC chat with Stephen. There were some fruitful discussions by people who were interested to contribute what they could. As far as I can tell, Philip is not interested in e.g. maintaining procmail.org and if we don't attempt to coordinate things, nobody will develop the site or maintain any mailing lists at all.
The reason I want a certain level of bureaucracy is that if there is no agenda and people don't agree on what we need to talk about ahead of time, we will be wasting people's time. I don't know about you, but I cannot presently afford to waste any time.
/* era */
Reply-To directed back to procmail-dev. Let's not distribute this discussion over several mailing lists, please.
Quoting era eriksson era@iki.fi:
Two steps back. Historical overview: Stephen is the original author. Philip took over a year ago after an IRC chat with Stephen. There were some fruitful discussions by people who were interested to contribute what they could. As far as I can tell, Philip is not interested in e.g. maintaining procmail.org and if we don't attempt to coordinate things, nobody will develop the site or maintain any mailing lists at all.
OK, let's coordinate :) The difficulties I see with procmail/SL is the lack of communication with the responsible persons. I see several possibilities:
a) Nothing changes b) Transfer to a host like sourceforge.net c) distributed hosting, e.g. packages at procmail.org, mailing lists at host abc, CVS at xyz
Except (a) the easiest solution would be the hosting at something like sourceforge.net. They have a good connectivity and offering facilities like ssh, cvs and ftp. We would need someone who will hosting and maintaining procmail.org to point to this site. Since sourceforge is running mailman it would be also nice to to run the lists somewhere else with SmartList.
(c) is probably most difficult to realize because it needs much more communication and coordination than (b) but if there are the right people ...
Reply-To directed back to procmail-dev. Let's not distribute this discussion over several mailing lists, please.
As I remember the thread started in the smartlist list. I am not a member of procmail-dev and would appreciate a CC to smartlist.
Werner
At 7:44 AM -0400 8/21/00, era eriksson is rumored to have typed:
As far as I can tell, Philip is not interested in e.g. maintaining procmail.org and if we don't attempt to coordinate things, nobody will develop the site or maintain any mailing lists at all.
Then Philip decides who _will_ maintain procmail.org, and said person does it. Gees, this seems so _simple_ to me...am I the only one who doesn't see this whole thing as a major problem? Philip _is_ the maintainer of the software, and as such is in the position that Stephen was in many years ago. If he wants to do something crazy like run the mailing lists with Mreply, he's welcomed to do so since he's de facto the boss. These two software packages don't need committees, they need for us to accept the reality of the situation (Philip's in charge and should do pretty much whatever he wants) and move on. Any time Philip doesn't want to maintain the software, he's welcomed to find someone else to do so, and then _that_ person will make the decisions.
(*sigh*) I just don't understand where the problem is, here.
I don't know about you, but I cannot presently afford to waste any time.
Me, neither, but I hate to see time wasted at all. Which is why the idea of spending months screwing around not getting anything done, simply making plans to make plans to make plans, is so abhorant to me.
Committees do have their place, particularly in business where people spend most of their time trying to avoid responsibility for a decision. This stuff is _simple,_ and making it difficult will only waste the time you cannot afford to waste in the first place. This is why I refuse to work any longer for larger companies - I'm getting too old to waste my life in staff meetings watching people intentionally get nothing done to justify their existance.
You want an adjenda? Tell Stephen to abandon in name the software he abandoned in reality years ago. Gee, that was easy.
Reply-To directed back to procmail-dev. Let's not distribute this discussion over several mailing lists, please.
I agree with Werner; first off, this is NOT a development issue, it's one dealing with the mailing lists. And as Werner mentioned, this _did_ start on the SmartList list, which is where it should stay. There's no reason to limit this discussion to only those on the development list, and I for one have no intention of doing so. (I believe it was _you_ who decided to copy it to procmail and dev in the first place.)
Charlie (who believes in making decisions, accepting responsibility for them, and moving on - which may be why he isn't popular, but _does_ get things done)
P.S. It's apparent to me that Philip has "decided by not deciding" to leave the mailing lists where they are under the software they are runing under, so we're all pretty much wasting time talking about this, anyway.
Me
Charlie Summers charlie@lofcom.com writes:
At 7:44 AM -0400 8/21/00, era eriksson is rumored to have typed:
As far as I can tell, Philip is not interested in e.g. maintaining procmail.org and if we don't attempt to coordinate things, nobody will develop the site or maintain any mailing lists at all.
Then Philip decides who _will_ maintain procmail.org, and said person does it. Gees, this seems so _simple_ to me...am I the only one who doesn't see this whole thing as a major problem? Philip _is_ the maintainer of the software, and as such is in the position that Stephen was in many years ago. If he wants to do something crazy like run the mailing lists with Mreply, he's welcomed to do so since he's de facto the boss. These two software packages don't need committees, they need for us to accept the reality of the situation (Philip's in charge and should do pretty much whatever he wants) and move on. Any time Philip doesn't want to maintain the software, he's welcomed to find someone else to do so, and then _that_ person will make the decisions.
You want a pronouncement from me? Here's one: I abdicate any responsibility for the mailing lists. I didn't think I had any to begin with, but you seem to think so, so I'll give it up. If anyone wants to take over the procmail or smartlist mailing lists they should just contact Guido Bunsen bunsen@rz.RWTH-Aachen.de and go for it. He gives the following numbers for subscribers:
340 smartlist 560 procmail-announce 870 procmail
If you have the time, interest, and capability to handle lists that size, go for it. Don't bother asking me to annoint you: my holy oil is already packed for when I move in less than a month.
Next question?
...
I agree with Werner; first off, this is NOT a development issue, it's one dealing with the mailing lists. And as Werner mentioned, this _did_ start on the SmartList list, which is where it should stay. There's no reason to limit this discussion to only those on the development list, and I for one have no intention of doing so. (I believe it was _you_ who decided to copy it to procmail and dev in the first place.)
['_you_' being era, I believe]
Well, the '-dev' lists have historically (for about 22 months now) been where people who are interested in all these procmail & smartlist meta-issues congregate. I've removed the procmail list from the cc: on this message, as it seems overkill to spread it to there.
As for it not being a development issue, if that's true why are you trying to pin it on me? I'm a developer, not an 'owner'. If you're going to wait for me to do something on this, you're going to be waiting a *long* time.
Charlie (who believes in making decisions, accepting responsibility for them, and moving on - which may be why he isn't popular, but _does_ get things done)
...and assigning responsibilities to other people.
P.S. It's apparent to me that Philip has "decided by not deciding" to leave the mailing lists where they are under the software they are runing under, so we're all pretty much wasting time talking about this, anyway.
I don't get this.
1) I said that someone needs to select him or herself to take on the lists, and then just do it. 2) In your reply you said, "(Consider this a volunteer, although there are others more capable than I to operate the list.)"
Putting those two statements together leads to the question: why haven't you grabbed the lists?
Philip Guenther
At 11:43 PM -0400 8/21/00, guenther+smartlist@gac.edu is rumored to have typed:
As for it not being a development issue, if that's true why are you trying to pin it on me? I'm a developer, not an 'owner'. If you're going to wait for me to do something on this, you're going to be waiting a *long* time.
I'm not trying to "pin" anything on anyone. (*sigh*) Like it or not, you're the chief grand poo-bah (referencing Philip, since there seems to be some confusion when I . I know you want to stick your head into the sand on this, and abdicate, but you simply cannot. I know you are uncomfortable with all this, but it's YOUR decision to make; if you don't mind the lists running on mailman, that's just peachie. If you do, and want someone else to operate the lists using SmartList, just say the word.
You _are_ the "owner" of the software package, maintainer of the code, and the closest thing we have to a "daddy" here. I am NOT saying you need to do all the work (indeed, you _shouldn't_ be doing all the work); I _am_ saying that you need to make all of the DECISIONS. So far, both Werner and I have offered our servers to run the mailing lists, and I'm sure there are other people here who would be honored to perform this small service as well.
But we are NOT the keepers of the flame, you are.
Putting those two statements together leads to the question: why haven't you grabbed the lists?
Because I don't "grab" anything. I have offered to maintain the mailing lists on my server using SmartList; I also mentioned that others have, as well, and perhaps those others are more qualified.
Let me make my position perfectly clear - I will gladly donate time and server space for the lists, but they ARE NOT CURRENTLY MINE TO OPERATE, so I won't be "grabbing" them from anyone...I don't do palace coups. This isn't a question of "annointing," either, it's a matter of the head honcho of the software deciding whether the lists should stay where they are or move, and if moved, to where.
Charlie (who's rather horrified at the small number of subscribers to the lists)
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Charlie Summers wrote:
Charlie (who's rather horrified at the small number of subscribers to the lists)
Hey Charlie,
If it will increase your horror, then you aught to know I'm still here, heh. And ditto, I would be happy to host the lists and web searchable archives using my qmailed, verped SL.
But as I have always maintained since Stephen was active on the list, SL needs to be rebuilt from the ground up to be positioned for the future.
Hee hee,
--Paul T.
-- Windows98 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 08:49:42PM -0700, CueMan wrote:
If it will increase your horror, then you aught to know I'm still here, heh. And ditto, I would be happy to host the lists and web searchable archives using my qmailed, verped SL.
But as I have always maintained since Stephen was active on the list, SL needs to be rebuilt from the ground up to be positioned for the future.
If you don't use the lists for beta testing it's ok ;)
Werner
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Werner Reisberger wrote:
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 08:49:42PM -0700, CueMan wrote:
If it will increase your horror, then you aught to know I'm still here, heh. And ditto, I would be happy to host the lists and web searchable archives using my qmailed, verped SL.
But as I have always maintained since Stephen was active on the list, SL needs to be rebuilt from the ground up to be positioned for the future.
If you don't use the lists for beta testing it's ok ;)
Beta testing? My SL based listserver is used everyday by many people and all is well. Heh, I wouldn't try pullin one over on folks that know better anyway!
--Paul
-- Windows98 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
At 11:43 PM -0400 8/21/00, guenther+smartlist@gac.edu is rumored to have typed: You _are_ the "owner" of the software package, maintainer of the code, and the closest thing we have to a "daddy" here. I am NOT saying you need to do all the work (indeed, you _shouldn't_ be doing all the work); I _am_ saying that you need to make all of the DECISIONS. So far, both Werner and I have offered our servers to run the mailing lists, and I'm sure there are other people here who would be honored to perform this small service as well.
But we are NOT the keepers of the flame, you are.
I really don't understand this emotionally discussion. There are some simple things to decide and it shouldn't be too difficult to stay cool!?
If Guenther don't want to decide about the lists we (the people who are willing to host them) should decide it. For myself it's most important that the lists can be safely hosted at the new place for years and that the responsible person is able to maintain them (and the respective web archives) for years. There needs to be also someone who will be responsible for www.procmail.org to update the links.
There are more open questions but we don't need to discuss everything emotionally until it dies.
Werner
At 5:01 PM -0400 8/22/00, Werner Reisberger is rumored to have typed:
I really don't understand this emotionally discussion. There are some simple things to decide and it shouldn't be too difficult to stay cool!?
Er...it's _not" an emotional discussion, at least on my end. You missintepret my argument style for anger or other emotion.
If Guenther don't want to decide about the lists we (the people who are willing to host them) should decide it.
I COMPLETELY disagree. (Unemotionally, that is.)
There are more open questions but we don't need to discuss everything emotionally until it dies.
See, I'm a firm believer that a group of people can _never_ react quickly enough to get anything done in this world. I believe one person _can_ make decisions rapidly enough to deal with the flow of current (and future) informaiton. So I make the case that "we" shouldn't be deciding _anything,_ and that Philip should.
I realize this sounds strange in the politically-correct atmosphere of trying to make everyone happy, but it's how I feel. In those areas where I am the one in control, I listen to the input from those interested, then I make a decision and move on. I might be wrong, but I accept responsibility for it when I am and move on. In a recent example of a unilateral decision I made affecting one of my mailing lists, some people felt strongly enough to leave the lists. That's a shame, but I didn't lose any sleep over it, since both they and I did what we respectively thought to be "right."
Emotional? Heck, no. Convinced that a committee can do nothing but confuse a clear-cut issue? You bet'cha.
Charlie
See, I'm a firm believer that a group of people can _never_ react quickly enough to get anything done in this world. I believe one person _can_ make decisions rapidly enough to deal with the flow of current (and future) informaiton. So I make the case that "we" shouldn't be deciding _anything,_ and that Philip should.
Follow the man with the bundle of sticks! :p
(Trimmed Werner from the Cc: list, figuring he will see this anyway.)
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:22:27 -0400, Charlie Summers charlie@lofcom.com wrote:
See, I'm a firm believer that a group of people can _never_ react quickly enough to get anything done in this world. I believe one person _can_ make decisions rapidly enough to deal with the flow of current (and future) informaiton. So I make the case that "we" shouldn't be deciding _anything,_ and that Philip should.
That also nicely solves the (admittedly rather academic case of) lack of coordination when several people independently decide, "heck, I'LL do it".
The purpose of the "committee" meeting I'm proposing is really an audience with Philip the Lord so he can decide what he wants us pathetic volunteer peons to do for him so he can concentrate on what he does best. But he can't delegate to people who don't attend.
One item for the agenda: Sign over SmartList to somebody who has an active interest in maintaining and developing the package. I have been thinking about some good candidates but again I guess it boils down to who has the time and is willing to do it. (You Know Who You Are and if you're interested, be there.)
/* era */
Greetings from Texas where I have been tweaking Smartlist for the past couple of years. I am still on the list, but do not read many messages. I noticed this thread and started reading backwards.
My understanding is that procmail and smartlist are moving the mailing lists, to a non SL host, and that this has prompted some discussion on the future of Smartlist ?
I noticed that several people have volunteered to host the lists, and I think there are a few addon kits available for those looking. I think the mailing list memberships were counted in the hundreds.
I have some add-ons that are probably useful to people prepared to spend the time to study them, and be prepared to work around things creatively. I had released an early version of on and off commands in front of SL at ftp://ftp.mail-list.com/front-end.tar.gz
I have a bunch more extensions that I have amalagated when people complain about something or another. It's usually easier to adjust the system, than it is to argue with them. I have incorporated code found from all sorts of places. My thanks to all the people that have contributed to Procmail and Smartlist, because I have used everything I could get my hands on.
I personally do not care where the lists are hosted, nor what mailing list software they run upon. I will also mention that based on my understanding of the list size and volume, it appears hosting them would not be a burden and for the record, I will volunteer mailing list services, if all other offers do not pan out.
I expect to someday release my current addons to SL under the GPL license. It's mainly other people's code that I have borrowed, and an occasional perl script by me. It's tightly tied into Exim for the MTA, and it has another 6 or 8 commands for list administrators, that is patched into x_command, and handles bounces fairly well (for a sequential text file list). However, it's in a state of chaos right now, and won't compile :-)
smartlist@lists.rwth-aachen.de
-
Charlie Summers -
CueMan -
Dan Kappus -
era eriksson -
guenther+smartlist＠gac.edu -
mark david mcCreary -
Matt Dunford -
Philip Guenther -
Werner Reisberger