On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Dec 11, 2011, at 7:47 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Andrea Pescetti >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Il 11/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Andrea Pescetti <...> wrote: >>>> >>>>> - A support list, named ooo-users-it at incubator.apache.org >>>>> - A project list, named ooo-project-it at incubator.apache.org >>>> >>>> I wonder if ooo-general-it.i.a.o might be possible, instead of >>>> ooo-project-it.i.a.o? >>> >>> >>> It would be possible but suboptimal, as "general" is not "general" for us, >>> since most people will want to subscribe to "users" and the "project" list >>> would be "specific" (i.e., for volunteers) and not "general". This is why I >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> I propose to ... use "ooo-project-it" instead of "ooo-general-it" >>>>> >>>>> since it is much easier to understand for us. >>> >>> >>> Then we could revise the names at graduation time; it might well be that the >>> Japanese list is renamed too. >>> >> >> >> Tt is a convention at Apache for the main list of a project to be a >> "dev" list and for it to cover more than just coding. But we could >> decide to make a different convention if we think it would be less >> confusing to our community. >> >> To me "general" means a general project list, not specifically dev, or >> qa or marketing, but all of these functions. >> >> I don't have a strong preference for one naming scheme over another, >> but it would be good to be consistent. If we go with "project" then >> maybe we rename ooo-dev to [email protected] at >> graduation? > > The consistency is as follows: > > (1) MLs have this form: ooo-*@incubator.a.o > > (2) NL MLs have the form: ooo-*-<nl-code>@i.a.o > > (3) Apache convention is about the main list being [email protected]. I've seen > nothing to suggest it has to apply to every NL. > > (4) ML names have to be valid for Apache Infra and not profane or otherwise > problematic. > > I think we have to follow each NL's understanding of their own language. >
OK. That's a good argument. Maybe they would even want ooo-foo-it, where foo is something in Italian. That would be reasoable, subject to any character range restrictions in ezlmlm. -Rob > So, totally +1 to Andrea's plan. > > Regards, > Dave > > >> >> -Rob >> >> >>> Anyway it's clear that neither of ooo-general-it and ooo-project-it would be >>> a final list name, since the "ooo" acronym will much likely disappear upon >>> graduation. I was merely trying to get names a bit more in the right >>> direction. >>> >>> If ooo-project-it is not OK, settling on ooo-general-it will surely be >>> better than leaving several hundreds people waiting for a solution. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Andrea. >
