Erik, > I don't have a view of the whole setup, so I may be missing some aspects > that complicate this. But even then, it may be worth the effort.
The piece you're missing is that I'm trying to get Mailman support off of my plate; not make it a more integral part of the system. The CF conventions activities are supported at LLNL, not at NCAR. The original CF website which I created at NCAR was moved to LLNL quite a few years ago, but for reasons I've never understood it wasn't possible, at least at that time, to support a Mailman server there. So it stayed at NCAR, and has been stuck here ever since. Again, I don't really see why moving all discussion to github wouldn't be preferable to having discussions on both github and a Mailman list (wherever that list might reside). But I'm not a github expert so don't know whether there are drawbacks to having all the discussions there. Brian On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 3:14 PM Painter, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote: > It certainly is a hack! When we set up this two-list system long ago, > LLNL's lists were managed by Majordomo. No they are run by LISTSERV. I > don't know whether LISTSERV supports flexible topics within the list. > > On 11/7/18, 1:58 PM, "Erik Quaeghebeur" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear Brian, > > > > I don't believe that [email protected] is a mailman > list. The > > cf-metadata mailman list (which I administer at NCAR) is > > [email protected]. The LLNL server is the one that gets the > github > > notifications and sends them to *mostly* the same people who are > members of > > the mailman list. I say mostly because the membership in these > lists is > > synchronized by hand. When people sign up or remove themselves from > the > > mailman list, I send this information to Jeff Painter who then makes > the > > changes at LLNL. We originally set things up like this so that > people > > didn't need to sign up in two places to follow the discussions that > were > > happening on the mailman list and on the trac server at LLNL. As > github > > has replaced trac the current system was set up. > > I understand the logic, but this sounds like a hack. It seems this can > be > dealt with as follows: > > * You as cf-metadata admin creates topics as needed > * LLNL list traffic is sent to the cf-metadata list using one or more > specific topic that people can (un)subscribe (from) to. > > It seems to me such an approach would have multiple advantages: > > * No need to (manually) sync users > * Users are in control of selecting topics > * Reverse traffic is likely possible by users sending mail to the > appropriate topic (how exactly this works, I don't know, but it would > surprise me if this were not possible) > > I don't have a view of the whole setup, so I may be missing some > aspects > that complicate this. But even then, it may be worth the effort. > > > Best, > > Erik > > >
