Good catch. I hadn't been thinking about list subscribers so much as wiki contributors, bugzilla contributors, and code contributors/committers in the legacy OpenOffice.org artifacts. Maybe forum contributors too. Even if they never contribute to Apache OO.o, they need to be distinguished from anyone who does.
Not being on a mailing list is different. I like the idea of sending out e-mail verifiers for resubscription, although one has to dig their e-mail address out of the current subscription list even to do that much. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Donald Whytock [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 13:56 To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Identifying Contributors][DISCUSS] (was RE: [Issues] [DISCUSS] Can we track Issues Somehow? ... ) Ideally you'd be able to send a unique code to people on the old lists, similar to the confirmation code sent to subscribers here, that took them to a form for subscribing to Apache lists by entering a new email address or confirming the old one. I think someone said importing the subscriber list from the old lists wasn't an option anyway, and some people, for whatever reason, might not want to be on the new lists. Don On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: > With regard to the migration of issues, are we going to manage to preserve > the identity of those who posted and commented on issues? > > I know there is some connection among issue creators, patch creators, and the > source-code histories that are somehow tied into particular identification > schemes, along with those for previous wiki contributors, folks having > @openoffice.org addresses, etc. > > I've been wondering how we might crack that nut and have a way to preserve > the identifications that exist while foreclosing their continuing usage as we > move to ASF-hosted infrastructure and in-project sites. > > - Dennis > > MUSINGS/THOUGHT-STARTERS, ETC. > > I am an user on a system that did some merges and expansions. They had to > cope with conflicts among IDs. They did it by adding suffixes to colliding > IDs from all identifier domains but one. If there was no collision, there > was no modification necessary. > > At Apache, one place where collision becomes tricky is when folks had short > names that might now (or in future) collide with names in the Apache user > name/ID domain. That might not be so serious as it first appears if we think > in terms of e-mail uniqueness (so [email protected] and [email protected] are > distinct, for example), rather than simple user name/ID values. But it is > desirable to differentiate short names when they are the link to the > distinguishing identity information, and to avoid issuance of duplicates in > any place where colliding legacy use of short names occurs. > > Also, with regard to [email protected], I think it would be good to preserve the > forwarding service but not allow new sign-ups. I don't know if we should > allow folks to update the forwarded-to e-mail address indefinitely or even > for a short time. My inclination is to allow it, possibly with an option to > declare that they are abandoning the address.
