On Nov 27, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Nov 27, 2011, at 12:59 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Andrea Pescetti >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 21/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Please note: I don't want to discuss here the merits of shutting down >>>>> or not shutting down such a forwarding service. That discussion was >>>>> made moot by an ASF Board decision against hosting such a >>>>> general-access email forwarding service like the legacy OOo had. >>>> >>>> OK, I've read it and I still believe it was probably a bad choice, but we >>>> will have to respect it. >>>> >>>>> We didn't create this problem, but we're the best ones >>>>> to help reduce the pain of this shutdown. >>>> >>>> Sure. And I would actually turn your proposal in something less negative; >>>> say, I would add that people who believe that an e-mail address is >>>> important >>>> for community building can become Apache OpenOffice committers by >>>> meritocracy and obtain an @apache.org e-mail address (or forwarder, or >>>> whatever it is). >>>> >>> >>> Good point. >>> >>>>> 4) Work with Infra@ on a custom bounce notification that would be sent >>>>> in response to all openoffice.org emails. It would link to the wiki >>>>> page from step #3. Coordinate this so it is ready on or before the >>>>> forwarder shutdown date. >>>> >>>> Here it will be important to avoid that someone receives a deluge of >>>> notifications by some automated system that is still in place in the >>>> complex >>>> OpenOffice.org infrastructure. So this has to be handled carefully, but I'm >>>> in favor of an automated response. >>>> >>> >>> So what systems do you think might be sending a lot of emails at once >>> to openoffice.org email addresses? >>> >>> 1) Legacy OpenOffice.org mailing lists >>> >>> 2) Bugzilla? >>> >>> Any others? >>> >>> Give the above, it probably makes sense if we first disable the legacy >>> mailing lists, and only then disable the email forwarder. That will >>> eliminate the largest source of bounce notifications. >> >> You should discuss the details with Andrew Rist. >> >> Let's not forgot that we do not need the same urgency retiring email >> forwarders that we require for migrating the website. >> > > I feel some urgency on retiring the email forwarder. As I stated > before, with 500,000 email addresses we cannot be certain that some > are not being used by individuals impersonating official roles for the > project. That was hypothetical before. But know we have evidence of > actual instances of this. Also, if you recall, the Board concerns > about the service had nothing to do with the ease oir difficulty of > migration. It was on policy grounds. > > So I'm going to continue pushing for a coordinated, clean retirement > of that service, along with the legacy mailing lists.
+1 then - let's just not tie it directly with the site migration. Even though the order might change details we should each proceed semi-independently. If there are blanket changes you would like to make in ooo-site let us know. Making blanket changes in Kenai is what I wish to avoid. Regards, Dave > > -Rob > >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Andrea. >>>> >> >>
