On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 1:19 PM Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 7/8/2019 1:12 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > >> re: pmcs/simple alias, from discussions in years, [email protected] was > >> considered a restricted email address that needed to meet pretty express > >> requirements to email. I'm pretty sure we need at least coordination to > >> use it. > > Indeed: it should, in fact, be the Coordinator (as Outreachy defines > > that role, minus the fundraising aspects as I noted previously) that > > sends the message. Until one is appointed by the ASF, the person to > > send the message should be Gris. > > > > Yes, [email protected] should not be abused. It would be counter-productive to > > have a number of people helping by sending email to that alias. > > Sorry to email again on this topic. You are focusing on the who sends > the email for the committee. That's not my point and I think your tact > for soliciting for Outreachy Organizer role makes sense. > > However, even after the committee coordinates the content and defines > who sends the email (which the coordinator sounds good), there have been > restrictions on using [email protected]. I'm not sure who owns or approves > content sent to the alias but what I'm saying is we should coordinate > that and find out more. Who approves it or does it just send to all the > private@ PMC addresses which will trigger their moderation? Does it > include the incubator, etc? Anyone know who we can ask more information?
David and I can handle the approval, moderation, etc. As to the remainder of your question(s): lets defer that until we have a message to be sent and an understanding as to how we are going to organize this effort. > Regards, > > KAM > > -- > Kevin A. McGrail > Member, Apache Software Foundation > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 - Sam Ruby
