Re: archivemail-devel list: should it be subscribers-only?

[Brandon K. <kni...@bl...>]

For -users, you may be right.  Sorry, didn't look that closely.

For -devel, you can get both! :)  You could set up certain senders as =20
"auto accept" messages, and others requiring approval for subscription =20
and/or message submission.  The nice thing about some folks on a =20
whitelist and others on an approval list means that you could have two =20
levels of submitters: those who are known and trusted, those who are =20
helpful but are not part of the core team.

Again, just my opinion.  Please do whatever you think will help.  Of =20
course, if you find something doesn't work, you can always change it =20
with ease.  I'm not active on this project so I'm trying to be careful =20
not to inject too much of my opinions here, it might not reflect the =20
current active development team.

Hope this helps! :)

--=20
-bk





Quoting Nikolaus Schulz <mic...@we...>:

> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 08:23:03PM -0700, Brandon Knitter wrote:
>> Users list you may want to open up for subscription with verification
>> email confirmation.
>
> Isn't that the current configuration?  Anyone can subscribe, both to
> -user and -devel.  Only subscribers can post directly, non-subscriber
> postings are discarded for -user, but moderated for -devel.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
>> The -devel list I would recommend you keep it as is for two reasons:
>>
>>     1. keeps spammers out;
>
> If sf.net doesn't provide spam-filtering, I guess we might have to bite
> that bullet.  That is, forget about a really open list. :-(
>
>>     2. keeps end-user support questions out which should be on the -users
>>     list
>
> See below...
>
>> Please take my commments as a recommendation and adjust the settings
>> to what you feel are appropriate.
>
> Thanks.
>
> I thought about using the -devel list address as a general purpose,
> simple means to reach all of us, that is, the people in charge.  For
> example, as the maintainer email address in the archivemail
> distribution, or to automatically forward tracker state notifications
> to -devel, so that anyone who cares can pick items up.
>
> Regarding the latter, I've found the trackers still configured to send
> notifications to Paul, and I've temporarily set it to my email address.
> Obviously it would be much better to direct such general stuff to
> -devel.  But I don't think this will work with a moderated list.
>
> IMO list moderation means work for the moderators, involves annoying
> extra traffic (autogenerated blurb) for all parties, and leaves the
> sender both still barred from the list and in an uncertain state until
> his email is approved, with an unpredictable delay.  I guess most people
> wouldn't want to subscribe, because they simply have not enough interest
> in archivemail.
>
> Any suggestions how to get a *usable* general contact address for all of
> us?
>
> Nikolaus
>
>> Quoting Nikolaus Schulz <mic...@we...>:
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >apparently mailing lists at sourceforge.net are subscribers-only by
>> >default, that is, postings of non-members are moderated.  I would really
>> >prefer it to be open for anyone, so that users can easily contact us,
>> >but what about spam?  The sf.net docs don't state if they spam-filter
>> >the lists.  What's your bet?  Do you have experience with open mailing
>> >lists at sf.net?
>
> !DSPAM:4531170e317314848360862!
>
>
>