Thanks Matt! Ralph
> On Mar 21, 2017, at 10:15 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > No other opinions apparently. I suppose we'll go with the single list with > bounce messages. I'll follow up with infra later today. > > On 18 March 2017 at 13:12, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > OK. I guess I am fine with the bounce messages. Any other opinions? > > Ralph > >> On Mar 18, 2017, at 8:42 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> I got this response from Gavin: >> >> Hi [~jvz] Sorry but I think I'm going to push back on that last request. >> >> Merging the lists - no problem >> Merging all the subscribers - no problem >> Creating bounce messages directing people to use the merged target list - no >> problem >> >> People will know in advance this merger is going to take place, and if they >> forget I think it'll take only one or two bounce messages to get the hint. >> >> If you are :- >> >> a) Happy with that - pick a date this can be done , let all lists users know >> this is happening and the date then let me know. >> b) Not Happy with that - ping this ticket again and we'll escalate further. >> >> Thanks >> >> On 16 March 2017 at 22:23, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Oh, I didn't realise I had a response on how to handle that. Let me follow >> up with infra. >> >> On 16 March 2017 at 21:46, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >> Is there any follow-up to this? >> >> Ralph >> >>> On Mar 12, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >>> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >>> >>> 1. That seems fine to me. >>> 2. Is it possible to do both? I like the idea of annoying the sender but >>> still allowing the email to be sent. It would cool if it could even add >>> [list] to the start of the subject line. >>> 3. This is the main thing that needs to happen. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 12, 2017, at 7:49 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Some things: >>>> >>>> 1. Archives won't be merged. >>>> 2. Infra suggests it might be a better idea to have the old email >>>> addresses respond with a canned reply saying that the lists have moved >>>> over to dev@, though they can set it up all as aliases if we prefer. >>>> 3. Current subscribers from all dev lists would be automatically >>>> subscribed to the combined list. >>>> >>>> So, use aliases or have the old addresses bounce back and inform senders >>>> to use the new list? >>>> >>>> On 12 March 2017 at 18:31, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> Created a request, not sure if it's public: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-13651 >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/INFRA-13651> >>>> >>>> On 12 March 2017 at 17:11, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >>>> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >>>> Yes, >>>> >>>> If you could send the request to infra I would appreciate it. >>>> >>>> Ralph >>>> >>>>> On Mar 12, 2017, at 1:13 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The vote has been open for 5 days now. Based on the tallies and >>>>> discussions, it sounds like we'd like to merge the dev lists but keep the >>>>> user lists as is. Shall we move forward with combining them now? >>>>> >>>>> On 10 March 2017 at 12:27, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> Total agreement. >>>>> >>>>> On 10 Mar 2017 6:26 p.m., "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >>>>> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >>>>> This is exactly why we need one dev list. These last two responses >>>>> dropped the other lists. This is a horrible way to have discussions that >>>>> affect all the sub projects. >>>>> >>>>> Ralph >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd love to see more unified configurations in all the subprojects. Gary >>>>>> mentioned that as an idea for log4cxx as that would make it useful for >>>>>> his use case where they're using both Java and C++ in various projects. >>>>>> >>>>>> While the programming languages in use here (Java, .NET, PHP, and C++) >>>>>> aren't really compatible with each other, having similar architectures >>>>>> and plugin systems could help a bit in this regard. Having more >>>>>> inclusive conversations about this would be great. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10 March 2017 at 04:29, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com >>>>>> <mailto:mikael.stal...@magine.com>> wrote: >>>>>> I think that a vast majority of our users only uses one of the languages >>>>>> we support, and therefore only are interested in one of the subprojects. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>> We had once the discussion that we wanted all Apache Logging projects to >>>>>> become very similar in their usage, starting with the same or a very >>>>>> similar configuration. Given that we should aim towards one Apache >>>>>> Logging specification and several Apache Logging specification >>>>>> implementations in the form of Apache Logging subprojects. That means >>>>>> all the devs for all subprojects have to talk more. To me this is a good >>>>>> reasons to merge the dev mailing lists. Further I don't see why the same >>>>>> use case should not apply to the user mailing lists, too. Those mailing >>>>>> lists see very low traffic but all of them need a larger audience. Just >>>>>> quoting the last few messages of two user mailing lists I follow: >>>>>> >>>>>> log4j-user: the last topic came in a week ago, the topic before that >>>>>> about two weeks ago >>>>>> log4net-user: the last topic came in 24 hours ago and the topic before >>>>>> that a month ago >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2017-03-09 19:24, Ralph Goers wrote: >>>>>>> We use general as mainly an announcement list for topics that might be >>>>>>> of general interest to all logging projects. Generally, these are just >>>>>>> release announcements. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >>>>>>>> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yeah, I agree that the user lists can remain separate as it doesn't >>>>>>>> cause any issues currently. The main idea here is whether we should >>>>>>>> merge the dev lists into one, or if we need a common dev list for all >>>>>>>> devs to subscribe to (general@ doesn't sound appropriate, but I don't >>>>>>>> know what that list is for). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9 March 2017 at 10:26, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >>>>>>>> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>> You should note that while we consider all votes only PMC votes are >>>>>>>> “binding”. I don’t think that changes much however. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From a PMC perspective I have to say that keeping the user’s lists >>>>>>>> separate isn’t likely to be an issue as most of the things that would >>>>>>>> need to be discussed would be on a dev list anyway. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 2:45 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>> <mailto:dpsen...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The votes are way too scattered over the different mailing lists so >>>>>>>>> that I didn't even find my own vote. ;-) Therefore I'm trying to >>>>>>>>> summarize the current state of the vote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ -> >>>>>>>>> d...@logging.apache.org <mailto:d...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker: +1 >>>>>>>>> Ralph Goers: +1 >>>>>>>>> Stefan Bodewig: +1 >>>>>>>>> Sven Rautenverg: -1 >>>>>>>>> Thorsten Schöning: -0 >>>>>>>>> Ivan Habunek: -0 >>>>>>>>> Dominik Psenner: +1 >>>>>>>>> Remko Popma: +1 >>>>>>>>> Mikael Ståldal: +0 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Totals so far: >>>>>>>>> +1: 5 >>>>>>>>> +0: 1 >>>>>>>>> -0: 2 >>>>>>>>> -1: 1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@, general@ -> >>>>>>>>> u...@logging.apache.org <mailto:u...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker: -1 >>>>>>>>> Ralph Goers: +1 >>>>>>>>> Stefan Bodewig: -1 >>>>>>>>> Sven Rautenverg: -1 >>>>>>>>> Thorsten Schöning: -0 >>>>>>>>> Ivan Habunek: -0 >>>>>>>>> Dominik Psenner: +1 >>>>>>>>> Remko Popma: +1 >>>>>>>>> Mikael Ståldal: -1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Totals so far: >>>>>>>>> +1: 3 >>>>>>>>> +0: 0 >>>>>>>>> -0: 2 >>>>>>>>> -1: 4 >>>>>>>>> Sorry to anyone who's vote is missing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 2017-03-08 05:20, Matt Sicker wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I may be missing some mailing lists considering I just subscribed to >>>>>>>>>> half of them less than five minutes ago. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is a vote to merge the various Apache Logging Services mailing >>>>>>>>>> lists. The proposal is to combine them as follows: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ -> >>>>>>>>>> d...@logging.apache.org <mailto:d...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>>>>> log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@, general@ >>>>>>>>>> -> u...@logging.apache.org <mailto:u...@logging.apache.org> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> commits@ and private@ remain the same as before. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The proposal would also suggest that the old emails become aliases >>>>>>>>>> for the combined email names so as not to lose any future emails. To >>>>>>>>>> distinguish between projects, a subject tag can be added such as: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [java] >>>>>>>>>> [net] >>>>>>>>>> [cxx] >>>>>>>>>> [php] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Though I wouldn't think such a tag is required, though it should >>>>>>>>>> help in gaining the attention of the appropriate audience. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Voting: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1: Yes, combine the mailing lists! >>>>>>>>>> +0: Go ahead, don't care that much. >>>>>>>>>> -0: Don't like it, but not vetoing it. >>>>>>>>>> -1: No, don't do that! I have a better idea! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This vote follows the same "lazy consensus" (at least 3 +1 binding, >>>>>>>>>> no -1/vetoes) we use for general releases and whatnot. The vote will >>>>>>>>>> be open for at least 72 hours. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Mikael Ståldal >>>>>> Senior software developer >>>>>> >>>>>> Magine TV >>>>>> mikael.stal...@magine.com <mailto:mikael.stal...@magine.com> >>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com >>>>>> <http://www.magine.com/> >>>>>> >>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this >>>>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message >>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may >>>>>> not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, >>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply >>>>>> email. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> > > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>>
