Mailing list details

[Erik Walthinsen <omega@omegacs.net>]

> Maybe we should change this line to specify what kind of discussion
> belongs in this list.  This is open to interpretation as to how broad a
> range the list covers.
Good point.  Arma, you want to look into rewriting that?

> So, I for one, assume that if an individual posts to this list they are
> not sub'd to other lists.  As a matter of fact, if you check your logs,
> you'll find that just the other day an individual posted to the project
> list, I moved the discussion to the UI list and saw a sub message from
> the server showing this person sub'd to the UI list.  No doubt to keep
> up with the thread.
IMO this is what should happen.  But see below first.

> So no matter how structured our lists are there has to be a general
> discussion list that's all-encompassing for users that don't want the
> development traffic.
Exactly what seul-project is for.

> I think we have it backwards.  It should be discussed in the general
> forum and then moved to the dev list for development and refinement
> once it's agreed upon by either the majority or "the powers that be"
> over that area.
Sorry, I guess I consider that common sense.  Then again, so is quoting 
only relevant parts, and that gets ignored too much too.  Yes, you are 
right.  Discuss always (well, almost) will start on the seul-project list.

You bring up another point: what defines when something has been decided?

The central player in this process will be the website.  By tomorrow it 
will be live and ready to put your documentation into.  Every group has 
mostly free reign (seul-pub has editorial control) over their parts of
the website, the html/ side and the doc/ side.  Posts such as the XDM 
loop-o-death fixes, autoprobing methods, etc., must be put on the website 
(hence under version control).

'Decisions' are a special process with the entire directory having !,:pub 
(clear list, add group pub [my own grammar])permissions, meaning *only*
seul-pub members can do anything.  These documents must be written 
*formally* and posted via a seul-pub member.  They will form the backbone 
of the project more than *anything* else.  Because of the version control, 
we will have a 'browser' that allows one to view all versions of the 
documents (one paper from each person who wishes to submit an opinion) in a 
timeline.  That allows people to watch the full evolution of this project.

For more (but rambling) information on the decisions process, load up
http://www.omegacs.net/~omega/seul/structure.

> I really don't want every swingin Tom, sub'd to the UI list where they
> will undoubtedly cause many long threads over topics dead and buried
> before they sub'd.  This will interfere with the development process
> and cause us to have to make more lists for developers only, in which
> they will have to be approved to join.
Yes, this is where we have to skate carefully (ok, I just watched the 
olympics, so sue me...).  Discussions must be moved off the -project list 
into the appropriate development list, but this has to be done at the 
appropriate time.  The reason I asked for discussions to be moved to the 
dev lists yesterday (and the day before) is that all the threads going 
currently do indeed belong on the development lists.

A balance needs to be found, and some method designed to handle the 
transition.  I would like to keep the point of transition under the control 
of the appropriate leaders, but I can only do this if I can be assured that 
the leaders can decide for themselves when to do that, and execute a 
successful transition.

A transition should include some kind of web documentation in the form of a 
list of all possibilities and some preliminary decision-ish thing by the 
leader.  A message could then be posted to the list formally pointing 
everyone at the page(s) and stating that the discussion has reached the 
point of requiring pure development work.  All followups and new discussion 
on said topic should be carried out on the appropriate development list.

The above is a 2min attempt at a method.  If anyone else has better ideas, 
please submit them semi-formally to the leaders list (i.e. in a separate 
message with appropriate intro and definitions) rather than burying it in a 
reply to this message.  A separate semi-formal response has a *vastly* 
improved chance of making its way to the website as an officialized view.

> We will still get this problem now, but if project allows all to discuss
> things without being forced into the dev lists they are likely to stay
> there unless they really want to get involved in that area.
The main problem is that if we *don't* move things to the appropriate list, 
we run the risk of flooding the seul-project list with more mail than 
people can handle.  I don't have a exact graph, but if I did, you would see
roughly the following:

traffic: |		___
	 |	     __-   -----____
	 |	   __		    ------________
	 |--____---				  -----------   . . .
	 --------------------------------------------------------------
subs:      o   o  o   o    o     o   o   o  o  o o  o   o    o  . . .
unsubs:		o	oooo o  o   o    o			. . .

I.E. whenever traffic spikes, so do unsubs.  I almost dread each massive 
spike (sometimes 30-40 messages a day on peak) because of the massive RIFs 
(Reduction In Force) that accompany them.

Basically, we need to balance things very carefully to keep traffic where 
it belongs, keep people interested, but not scare them away.

     Erik Walthinsen <omega@seul.org> - SEUL Project system architect
        __
       /  \                SEUL: Simple End-User Linux -
      |    | M E G A            Creating a Linux distribution
      _\  /_                         for the home or office user


===
SEUL-Leaders list, seul-leaders-request@seul.org
===