[cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
Hi,

There has been some discussion recently about how best to handle local 
CellML addresses (which can be used by local groups with an interest in 
CellML to arrange meetings and hold other discussions which are purely 
local in scope and not of interest to the broader CellML community).

At the University of Auckland, we have a list for the Auckland CellML 
team. However, I feel that some of the discussion on that list would 
probably better occur on the cellml-discussion mailing list (or another 
more public forum). After discussing this at our Auckland CellML group 
meeting, it was suggested that perhaps similar issues are arising at 
other localised groups working on CellML. To this end, we came up with a 
rough proposal (which I expand on below) which I hope will help both the 
Auckland group and other groups using CellML to collaborate.

Please note that this is just a proposal, and I would welcome feedback 
on how we can improve it. I would be especially interested to hear 
opinions from other groups outside Auckland using CellML.

Proposal:

1) Groups can request location@cellml.org mailing lists.
  a) Any group which is working on a CellML related project may [follow 
some procedure which needs to be decided] to request a mailing list for 
discussion of location specific matters related to their CellML project.
  b) The e-mail address requested shall follow the format 
location@cellml.org, where location is replaced with a short word, 
phrase, or abbrevation which describes the geographical location of the 
group concerned.
  c) The location name should be sufficient to uniquely distinguish the 
group from other separate groups that may wish to work on CellML. List 
names are subject to review to ensure that they are unlikely to conflict 
with another group or cause confusion.

2) Location-specific mailing lists to have open membership and be 
publicly archived.
  a) Any person may join any location-specific mailing list without 
moderator approval, regardless of their actual geographic location.
  b) All location-specific mailing lists shall have a publicly readable 
archive, hosted at cellml.org.

3) Scope and posting rules for location-specific mailing lists.
  a) All messages posted to location-specific mailing lists must be 
related in some way to CellML, or to tools which process CellML, or to 
the operation of groups with an interest in CellML. Some degree of 
leeway should be afforded by cellml.org administrators here, as long as 
the list is not being used as a free hosting service for work not even 
vaguely related CellML.
  b) Message posters are strongly encouraged to send messages which may 
be of broader interest to the cellml-discussion list rather than to the 
location-specific address.
  c) The location-specific mailing lists must not be used for 
information which is of a private or confidential nature (after all, it 
is an open membership list with a public archive).
  d) All posters to location-specific mailing lists agree that their 
messages may be further distributed (with attribution to them), 
including by forwarding to the cellml-discussion list or by inclusion in 
public bug-trackers (and also agree to the translation of their messages 
into another language).
  e) The location-specific groups may establish their own additional 
posting rules by their normal decision-making process, as long as these 
posting rules do not conflict with the general rules described here. 
These posting rules may include (without limitation) the scope of the 
list, who is allowed to post to the list (but not who can subscribe) and 
how often, and the permitted language(s) of any posts to the list.

4) Administration and moderation of location-specific mailing lists.
  a) Each location-specific group shall determine their own process for 
the control of their own mailing lists, and their nominated 
administrator will be provided with a password allowing them access to 
the administrative interface.
  b) Group designated administrators are free to change the settings of 
the groups location-specific CellML mailing list (after changes are 
approved through the appropriate local decision-making processes). 
However, they must not make changes which cause the mailing list 
archives to be no longer public, or which cause the list to require 
moderator approval before allowing subscriptions.
  c) Group designated administrators may also (in accordance with 
locally determined policies) subscribe and remove people from their 
mailing lists are a service to the person being added or removed. 
Administrators may infer that a person wishes to be added or removed 
from the mailing list if they are visiting / commencing employment or 
leaving the group respectively. However, administrators may not add or 
remove any person from the mailing list who does not wish to be added or 
removed, as this would prevent the list from being open membership.
  d) Group designated administrators may (in accordance 

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
David Nickerson wrote:
 Hi Andrew,

 I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very 
 easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local 
 communities with little interaction.
The intention is that these lists only be used for messages like 'There 
is a meeting on Level 6 at 10:00 am on Tuesday this week', or 'The 
recently announced release can be run by on Linux by local users from 
/people/blah/binaries/myprog', rather than significant CellML related 
issues, and that is the goal of my guideline.

I think that there are already very separate and distinct local 
communities (we hardly ever hear from many of the communities who are 
working on CellML), and the idea is that by acknowledging this and 
providing an archived, open resource for local discussions with an 
encouragement to send non-local messages to the more general list, we 
can actively build stronger community interactions.

  For the same reasons we removed the 
 cellml-tools mailing list, I would very much like to see 
 cellml-discussion remain as the only public forum for discussing CellML 
 related issues, until such time as we decide that the list is being 
 flooded with too many emails on one topic and we separate that topic off 
 onto its own mailing list. I have yet to see any need for this.
   
Although a lot of messages currently get sent directly to interested 
recipients to avoid flooding the list, and moving these onto a local 
list would cause them to be archived.
 The idea of the team-cellml mailing list was for discussion amongst the 
 original Auckland team on issues relating to the underlying functioning 
 of the CellML project and a place to debate decisions when consensus 
 could not be achieved amongst the wider CellML community.
  The 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list would not serve this purpose.
   
I don't think that we need a separate mailing list for this, because 
there is no need to tie decision making processes to the mailing list.

The process for developing a given resource is ultimately determined by 
whoever funds that resource, and the people who make the final decision 
can do so on the basis of discussions (which may include them) on the 
list. I don't see any need for a second mailing list for this.

 Andre.



 Andrew Miller wrote:
   
 Hi,

 There has been some discussion recently about how best to handle local 
 CellML addresses (which can be used by local groups with an interest in 
 CellML to arrange meetings and hold other discussions which are purely 
 local in scope and not of interest to the broader CellML community).

 At the University of Auckland, we have a list for the Auckland CellML 
 team. However, I feel that some of the discussion on that list would 
 probably better occur on the cellml-discussion mailing list (or another 
 more public forum). After discussing this at our Auckland CellML group 
 meeting, it was suggested that perhaps similar issues are arising at 
 other localised groups working on CellML. To this end, we came up with a 
 rough proposal (which I expand on below) which I hope will help both the 
 Auckland group and other groups using CellML to collaborate.

 Please note that this is just a proposal, and I would welcome feedback 
 on how we can improve it. I would be especially interested to hear 
 opinions from other groups outside Auckland using CellML.

 Proposal:
 
 1) Groups can request location@cellml.org mailing lists.
   a) Any group which is working on a CellML related project may [follow 
 some procedure which needs to be decided] to request a mailing list for 
 discussion of location specific matters related to their CellML project.
   b) The e-mail address requested shall follow the format 
 location@cellml.org, where location is replaced with a short word, 
 phrase, or abbrevation which describes the geographical location of the 
 group concerned.
   c) The location name should be sufficient to uniquely distinguish the 
 group from other separate groups that may wish to work on CellML. List 
 names are subject to review to ensure that they are unlikely to conflict 
 with another group or cause confusion.

 2) Location-specific mailing lists to have open membership and be 
 publicly archived.
   a) Any person may join any location-specific mailing list without 
 moderator approval, regardless of their actual geographic location.
   b) All location-specific mailing lists shall have a publicly readable 
 archive, hosted at cellml.org.

 3) Scope and posting rules for location-specific mailing lists.
   a) All messages posted to location-specific mailing lists must be 
 related in some way to CellML, or to tools which process CellML, or to 
 the operation of groups with an interest in CellML. Some degree of 
 leeway should be afforded by cellml.org administrators here, as long as 
 the list is not being used as a free hosting service for work not even 
 vaguely related CellML.
   b) Message posters are strongly encouraged to send 

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread David Nickerson
Andrew Miller wrote:
 David Nickerson wrote:
 Hi Andrew,

 I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very 
 easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local 
 communities with little interaction.
 The intention is that these lists only be used for messages like 'There 
 is a meeting on Level 6 at 10:00 am on Tuesday this week', or 'The 
 recently announced release can be run by on Linux by local users from 
 /people/blah/binaries/myprog', rather than significant CellML related 
 issues, and that is the goal of my guideline.

what is the benefit of a public archive of such messages?

 I think that there are already very separate and distinct local 
 communities (we hardly ever hear from many of the communities who are 
 working on CellML), and the idea is that by acknowledging this and 
 providing an archived, open resource for local discussions with an 
 encouragement to send non-local messages to the more general list, we 
 can actively build stronger community interactions.

Perhaps some examples of these local communities you envision might 
help? The ones that I know about that you might be referring to are (and 
the groups involved):

- The integration of CellML with JSim (Washington, Singapore, Auckland)
- The use of the CellML API in non-Auckland based tools (Kyoto, Osaka, 
Oxford, Singapore, Auckland)
- Model curation (the definition of level 4 curation) (Washington, 
Wisconsin, Oxford, Singapore, Auckland)

and probably others that I can't recall. Not sure how your idea of local 
communities would address these, and given the effort I have put into 
getting these discussion on the cellml-discussion mailing list, with 
little success, I don't see anything changing in the future.

  For the same reasons we removed the 
 cellml-tools mailing list, I would very much like to see 
 cellml-discussion remain as the only public forum for discussing CellML 
 related issues, until such time as we decide that the list is being 
 flooded with too many emails on one topic and we separate that topic off 
 onto its own mailing list. I have yet to see any need for this.
   
 Although a lot of messages currently get sent directly to interested 
 recipients to avoid flooding the list, and moving these onto a local 
 list would cause them to be archived.

as above, I'm not sure who your target is other than the Auckland group? 
and how you would get these personal discussions to take place on a 
publicly archived mailing list? and if you can achieve this it would be 
much more beneficial to the community to have them moved onto the 
cellml-discussion list rather than a local one.

 The idea of the team-cellml mailing list was for discussion amongst the 
 original Auckland team on issues relating to the underlying functioning 
 of the CellML project and a place to debate decisions when consensus 
 could not be achieved amongst the wider CellML community.
  The 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list would not serve this purpose.
   
 I don't think that we need a separate mailing list for this, because 
 there is no need to tie decision making processes to the mailing list.
 
 The process for developing a given resource is ultimately determined by 
 whoever funds that resource, and the people who make the final decision 
 can do so on the basis of discussions (which may include them) on the 
 list. I don't see any need for a second mailing list for this.

This is true and suitable for particular locally-based and driven 
resources (such as PCEnv). But for the larger community to succeed, 
there needs to be at some level a governing body of some kind that 
ensures (as best as possible within the constraints of time and money) 
that the project continues to progress with some consistency. The three 
community resources that I would see governed by such a body are the 
specifications (CellML and metadata), the model repository, and the API. 
But I think this is a different topic and not relevant to this discussion.


Andre.
___
cellml-discussion mailing list
cellml-discussion@cellml.org
http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion


Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
David Nickerson wrote:
 Andrew Miller wrote:
   
 David Nickerson wrote:
 
 Hi Andrew,

 I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very 
 easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local 
 communities with little interaction.
   
 The intention is that these lists only be used for messages like 'There 
 is a meeting on Level 6 at 10:00 am on Tuesday this week', or 'The 
 recently announced release can be run by on Linux by local users from 
 /people/blah/binaries/myprog', rather than significant CellML related 
 issues, and that is the goal of my guideline.
 

 what is the benefit of a public archive of such messages?
   
1) It makes it much easier for people to refer back to what has happened 
in the past, and makes it possible to search these messages using a 
search engine.
2) It helps to stop people from using the list as a 'private' list 
rather than a 'local' list, and so opens up the CellML community to new 
participants a lot more. Obviously, we can't stop people having private 
discussions if they want to do so, but providing a non-private forum for 
local discussions will hopefully help everyone to get a better idea at 
what other groups are doing.
3) It provides outsiders to a given local group the ability to search 
other groups without being flooded.

   
 I think that there are already very separate and distinct local 
 communities (we hardly ever hear from many of the communities who are 
 working on CellML), and the idea is that by acknowledging this and 
 providing an archived, open resource for local discussions with an 
 encouragement to send non-local messages to the more general list, we 
 can actively build stronger community interactions.
 

 Perhaps some examples of these local communities you envision might 
 help? The ones that I know about that you might be referring to are (and 
 the groups involved):

 - The integration of CellML with JSim (Washington, Singapore, Auckland)
 - The use of the CellML API in non-Auckland based tools (Kyoto, Osaka, 
 Oxford, Singapore, Auckland)
 - Model curation (the definition of level 4 curation) (Washington, 
 Wisconsin, Oxford, Singapore, Auckland)

 and probably others that I can't recall. Not sure how your idea of local 
 communities would address these, and given the effort I have put into 
 getting these discussion on the cellml-discussion mailing list, with 
 little success, I don't see anything changing in the future.
   
Don't forget the current local group (auckland@). I think that it is 
important that if we are to increase the community participation of the 
CellML project from outside of Auckland, we must move away from treating 
the Auckland group as special, so if we set up an auckland@ list, we 
really need to offer other groups the ability to do the same on equal 
terms (even if they don't accept this offer).
   
  For the same reasons we removed the 
 cellml-tools mailing list, I would very much like to see 
 cellml-discussion remain as the only public forum for discussing CellML 
 related issues, until such time as we decide that the list is being 
 flooded with too many emails on one topic and we separate that topic off 
 onto its own mailing list. I have yet to see any need for this.
   
   
 Although a lot of messages currently get sent directly to interested 
 recipients to avoid flooding the list, and moving these onto a local 
 list would cause them to be archived.
 

 as above, I'm not sure who your target is other than the Auckland group? 
 and how you would get these personal discussions to take place on a 
 publicly archived mailing list?
I presume most personal discussions take place because it would be 
inappropriate to flood the main lists with them, rather than because 
there is anything private about them. Hopefully, we can get these 
discussions out into the public just by providing the facilities for 
them to be archived.
  and if you can achieve this it would be 
 much more beneficial to the community to have them moved onto the 
 cellml-discussion list rather than a local one.
   
Unfortunately, the cellml-discussion list already gets so much traffic 
that people are unsubscribing or are reluctant to subscribe.

Perhaps we won't need this proposal if we instead go for the tracker 
based proposal.
   
 The idea of the team-cellml mailing list was for discussion amongst the 
 original Auckland team on issues relating to the underlying functioning 
 of the CellML project and a place to debate decisions when consensus 
 could not be achieved amongst the wider CellML community.
  The 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list would not serve this purpose.
   
   
 I don't think that we need a separate mailing list for this, because 
 there is no need to tie decision making processes to the mailing list.

 The process for developing a given resource is ultimately determined by 
 whoever funds that resource, and the people who make the final decision 
 can do 

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread James Lawson
Andrew Miller wrote:
 Hi,
 
 There has been some discussion recently about how best to handle local 
 CellML addresses (which can be used by local groups with an interest in 
 CellML to arrange meetings and hold other discussions which are purely 
 local in scope and not of interest to the broader CellML community).
 

Something I didn't think of before... surely most other groups already
have a mailing list that serves their group's interest anyway... What
would make it worthwhile for them to actually swap over to an official
cellml list?

 At the University of Auckland, we have a list for the Auckland CellML 
 team. However, I feel that some of the discussion on that list would 
 probably better occur on the cellml-discussion mailing list (or another 
 more public forum). After discussing this at our Auckland CellML group 
 meeting, it was suggested that perhaps similar issues are arising at 
 other localised groups working on CellML. To this end, we came up with a 
 rough proposal (which I expand on below) which I hope will help both the 
 Auckland group and other groups using CellML to collaborate.
 
 Please note that this is just a proposal, and I would welcome feedback 
 on how we can improve it. I would be especially interested to hear 
 opinions from other groups outside Auckland using CellML.
 
 Proposal:
 
 1) Groups can request location@cellml.org mailing lists.
   a) Any group which is working on a CellML related project may [follow 
 some procedure which needs to be decided] to request a mailing list for 
 discussion of location specific matters related to their CellML project.
   b) The e-mail address requested shall follow the format 
 location@cellml.org, where location is replaced with a short word, 
 phrase, or abbrevation which describes the geographical location of the 
 group concerned.
   c) The location name should be sufficient to uniquely distinguish the 
 group from other separate groups that may wish to work on CellML. List 
 names are subject to review to ensure that they are unlikely to conflict 
 with another group or cause confusion.
 
 2) Location-specific mailing lists to have open membership and be 
 publicly archived.
   a) Any person may join any location-specific mailing list without 
 moderator approval, regardless of their actual geographic location.
   b) All location-specific mailing lists shall have a publicly readable 
 archive, hosted at cellml.org.
 
 3) Scope and posting rules for location-specific mailing lists.
   a) All messages posted to location-specific mailing lists must be 
 related in some way to CellML, or to tools which process CellML, or to 
 the operation of groups with an interest in CellML. Some degree of 
 leeway should be afforded by cellml.org administrators here, as long as 
 the list is not being used as a free hosting service for work not even 
 vaguely related CellML.
   b) Message posters are strongly encouraged to send messages which may 
 be of broader interest to the cellml-discussion list rather than to the 
 location-specific address.
   c) The location-specific mailing lists must not be used for 
 information which is of a private or confidential nature (after all, it 
 is an open membership list with a public archive).
   d) All posters to location-specific mailing lists agree that their 
 messages may be further distributed (with attribution to them), 
 including by forwarding to the cellml-discussion list or by inclusion in 
 public bug-trackers (and also agree to the translation of their messages 
 into another language).
   e) The location-specific groups may establish their own additional 
 posting rules by their normal decision-making process, as long as these 
 posting rules do not conflict with the general rules described here. 
 These posting rules may include (without limitation) the scope of the 
 list, who is allowed to post to the list (but not who can subscribe) and 
 how often, and the permitted language(s) of any posts to the list.
 
 4) Administration and moderation of location-specific mailing lists.
   a) Each location-specific group shall determine their own process for 
 the control of their own mailing lists, and their nominated 
 administrator will be provided with a password allowing them access to 
 the administrative interface.
   b) Group designated administrators are free to change the settings of 
 the groups location-specific CellML mailing list (after changes are 
 approved through the appropriate local decision-making processes). 
 However, they must not make changes which cause the mailing list 
 archives to be no longer public, or which cause the list to require 
 moderator approval before allowing subscriptions.
   c) Group designated administrators may also (in accordance with 
 locally determined policies) subscribe and remove people from their 
 mailing lists are a service to the person being added or removed. 
 Administrators may infer that a person wishes to be added or removed 
 from the 

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread James Lawson
Andrew Miller wrote:
 David Nickerson wrote:
 Hi Andrew,

 I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very 
 easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local 
 communities with little interaction.
 The intention is that these lists only be used for messages like 'There 
 is a meeting on Level 6 at 10:00 am on Tuesday this week', or 'The 
 recently announced release can be run by on Linux by local users from 
 /people/blah/binaries/myprog', rather than significant CellML related 
 issues, and that is the goal of my guideline.
 
 I think that there are already very separate and distinct local 
 communities (we hardly ever hear from many of the communities who are 
 working on CellML), and the idea is that by acknowledging this and 
 providing an archived, open resource for local discussions with an 
 encouragement to send non-local messages to the more general list, we 
 can actively build stronger community interactions.
 

But how interested in these group-specific announcements are other
groups going to be?

  For the same reasons we removed the 
 cellml-tools mailing list, I would very much like to see 
 cellml-discussion remain as the only public forum for discussing CellML 
 related issues, until such time as we decide that the list is being 
 flooded with too many emails on one topic and we separate that topic off 
 onto its own mailing list. I have yet to see any need for this.
   
 Although a lot of messages currently get sent directly to interested 
 recipients to avoid flooding the list, and moving these onto a local 
 list would cause them to be archived.
 The idea of the team-cellml mailing list was for discussion amongst the 
 original Auckland team on issues relating to the underlying functioning 
 of the CellML project and a place to debate decisions when consensus 
 could not be achieved amongst the wider CellML community.
  The 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list would not serve this purpose.
   
 I don't think that we need a separate mailing list for this, because 
 there is no need to tie decision making processes to the mailing list.
 
 The process for developing a given resource is ultimately determined by 
 whoever funds that resource, and the people who make the final decision 
 can do so on the basis of discussions (which may include them) on the 
 list. I don't see any need for a second mailing list for this.
 Andre.



 Andrew Miller wrote:
   
 Hi,

 There has been some discussion recently about how best to handle local 
 CellML addresses (which can be used by local groups with an interest in 
 CellML to arrange meetings and hold other discussions which are purely 
 local in scope and not of interest to the broader CellML community).

 At the University of Auckland, we have a list for the Auckland CellML 
 team. However, I feel that some of the discussion on that list would 
 probably better occur on the cellml-discussion mailing list (or another 
 more public forum). After discussing this at our Auckland CellML group 
 meeting, it was suggested that perhaps similar issues are arising at 
 other localised groups working on CellML. To this end, we came up with a 
 rough proposal (which I expand on below) which I hope will help both the 
 Auckland group and other groups using CellML to collaborate.

 Please note that this is just a proposal, and I would welcome feedback 
 on how we can improve it. I would be especially interested to hear 
 opinions from other groups outside Auckland using CellML.

 Proposal:
 
 1) Groups can request location@cellml.org mailing lists.
   a) Any group which is working on a CellML related project may [follow 
 some procedure which needs to be decided] to request a mailing list for 
 discussion of location specific matters related to their CellML project.
   b) The e-mail address requested shall follow the format 
 location@cellml.org, where location is replaced with a short word, 
 phrase, or abbrevation which describes the geographical location of the 
 group concerned.
   c) The location name should be sufficient to uniquely distinguish the 
 group from other separate groups that may wish to work on CellML. List 
 names are subject to review to ensure that they are unlikely to conflict 
 with another group or cause confusion.

 2) Location-specific mailing lists to have open membership and be 
 publicly archived.
   a) Any person may join any location-specific mailing list without 
 moderator approval, regardless of their actual geographic location.
   b) All location-specific mailing lists shall have a publicly readable 
 archive, hosted at cellml.org.

 3) Scope and posting rules for location-specific mailing lists.
   a) All messages posted to location-specific mailing lists must be 
 related in some way to CellML, or to tools which process CellML, or to 
 the operation of groups with an interest in CellML. Some degree of 
 leeway should be afforded by cellml.org administrators here, as long as 
 the list is not