Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 6:57 AM Private List Moderation wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 19:24, Nathan Hartman wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:33 AM Daniel Sahlberg >> wrote: >> > >> > *thread reply* >> > >> > I think everyone should take a deep breath and then we should re-start the

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

Branko Čibej wrote on Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 08:03:04 +0100: > the purpose of moderation is [...] certainly not to anonymously enforce your > conception of policy, [...] For future reference, it wasn't entirely anonymous; the author's identity was recorded in the headers: Sender:

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 2:21 PM Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > Den lör 13 feb. 2021 kl 12:57 skrev Private List Moderation < > mod-priv...@gsuite.cloud.apache.org>: > > And what rules would you expect to see? >> > > Maybe this is too obvious but "the rules used by the moderators when > deciding to

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

Den tors 11 feb. 2021 kl 10:31 skrev Daniel Sahlberg < daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com>: > Den tors 11 feb. 2021 kl 10:11 skrev Stefan Sperling : > >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 09:57:23AM +0100, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: >> > It is indeed a chicken-and-egg problem. However I would suggest to split >> >

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

Den lör 13 feb. 2021 kl 12:57 skrev Private List Moderation < mod-priv...@gsuite.cloud.apache.org>: > I agree that this would be useful. > > Where would you expect to find such information? > I've searched and I can't find a really logical place. Maybe there is a place with information for the

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 19:24, Nathan Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:33 AM Daniel Sahlberg > wrote: > > > > *thread reply* > > > > I think everyone should take a deep breath and then we should re-start > the conversation with the purpose of learning and improving because at the >

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:33 AM Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > > *thread reply* > > I think everyone should take a deep breath and then we should re-start the > conversation with the purpose of learning and improving because at the moment > it seems that emotions are way to high. > > As I see it -

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

*thread reply* I think everyone should take a deep breath and then we should re-start the conversation with the purpose of learning and improving because at the moment it seems that emotions are way to high. As I see it - and as usual, I'm new to the party so I don't have historical context: *

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021, 14:36 Private List Moderation < mod-priv...@gsuite.cloud.apache.org> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 12:15, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> On 11.02.2021 12:23, Stefan Sperling wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:02:32AM +, Private List Moderation wrote: >> >> Irrelevant.

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 7:15 AM Branko Čibej wrote: > On 11.02.2021 12:23, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:02:32AM +, Private List Moderation wrote: > > Irrelevant. > > Given that this discussion doesn't seem to be going anywhere and the > same arguments from May 2020

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 12:15, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 11.02.2021 12:23, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:02:32AM +, Private List Moderation wrote: > > Irrelevant. > > Given that this discussion doesn't seem to be going anywhere and the > same arguments from May 2020 are

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 12:17, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 11.02.2021 12:02, Private List Moderation wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 07:04, Stefan Sperling wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:03:39PM -0500, Nathan Hartman wrote: >> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM Private List Moderation < >>

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On 11.02.2021 12:02, Private List Moderation wrote: On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 07:04, Stefan Sperling > wrote: On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:03:39PM -0500, Nathan Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM Private List Moderation < >

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On 11.02.2021 12:23, Stefan Sperling wrote: On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:02:32AM +, Private List Moderation wrote: Irrelevant. Given that this discussion doesn't seem to be going anywhere and the same arguments from May 2020 are just being rehashed, I guess we will simply stop using the

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:02:32AM +, Private List Moderation wrote: > Irrelevant. Given that this discussion doesn't seem to be going anywhere and the same arguments from May 2020 are just being rehashed, I guess we will simply stop using the announce@ mailing list.

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 07:04, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:03:39PM -0500, Nathan Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM Private List Moderation < > > mod-priv...@gsuite.cloud.apache.org> wrote: > > > When I checked the download page, there were no links for

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 04:03, Nathan Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM Private List Moderation < > mod-priv...@gsuite.cloud.apache.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 22:26, Erik Huelsmann wrote: >> >>> How can a link be more important than an announcement for a fix of an >>>

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:31:24AM +0100, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > Den tors 11 feb. 2021 kl 10:11 skrev Stefan Sperling : > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 09:57:23AM +0100, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > > > It is indeed a chicken-and-egg problem. However I would suggest to split > > > this "updating the

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

Den tors 11 feb. 2021 kl 10:11 skrev Stefan Sperling : > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 09:57:23AM +0100, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > > It is indeed a chicken-and-egg problem. However I would suggest to split > > this "updating the website" into two separate parts: > > 1. Updating the download page and

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 09:57:23AM +0100, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > It is indeed a chicken-and-egg problem. However I would suggest to split > this "updating the website" into two separate parts: > 1. Updating the download page and possibly also adding a news item (with a > placeholder link to the

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

[[ Continuing the discussion on dev@ only since I intend to discuss website update policy and not the current release ]] Den tors 11 feb. 2021 kl 08:04 skrev Stefan Sperling : > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:03:39PM -0500, Nathan Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM Private List

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:03:39PM -0500, Nathan Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM Private List Moderation < > mod-priv...@gsuite.cloud.apache.org> wrote: > > When I checked the download page, there were no links for versions 1.10.7 > > or 1.14.1. > > i.e. the 2 announce mails were

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On 11.02.2021 01:51, Private List Moderation wrote: On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 22:26, Erik Huelsmann > wrote: How can a link be more important than an announcement for a fix of an *unauthenticated* remote DoS ? When I checked the download page, there were no links

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM Private List Moderation < mod-priv...@gsuite.cloud.apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 22:26, Erik Huelsmann wrote: > >> How can a link be more important than an announcement for a fix of an >> *unauthenticated* remote DoS ? >> >> > When I checked the

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 22:26, Erik Huelsmann wrote: > How can a link be more important than an announcement for a fix of an > *unauthenticated* remote DoS ? > > When I checked the download page, there were no links for versions 1.10.7 or 1.14.1. i.e. the 2 announce mails were telling people to

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

How can a link be more important than an announcement for a fix of an *unauthenticated* remote DoS ? Same for the KEYS file??? Don't you think that's way out of proportion? Erik. On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 4:50 PM Private List Moderation wrote: > > I don't see how the missing links can be

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

I don't see how the missing links can be regarded as trivial. This obviously needs to be fixed before the announce can be accepted. At the same time, I asked for the KEYS file link to be standardised. There is already a KEYS file at the standard location - why not link to that instead? On Wed,

Re: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

Sebb, blocking our release announcements over trivialities like this really is not a nice thing to do. Last time it happened in May 2020. It was already discussed back then and raised with the announce@ moderation team. The Subversion PMC came to the conclusion that our handling of the KEYS files

[announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

Same thing as last time. Shrug. I suppose next time I will just drop announce@ from Cc... - Forwarded message from announce-ow...@apache.org - Date: 10 Feb 2021 15:20:01 - From: announce-ow...@apache.org To: s...@apache.org Subject: Returned post for annou...@apache.org Message-ID

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

wrote this? > > > > > > > > FWIW, the announce message was generated by release.py; if there's > > > > something wrong with that, we need to fix that script. > > > > There's nothing I could do now to correct the announce message > > > &

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

othing I could do now to correct the announce message > > > itself since it has already been approved (by me). > > > > > > - Forwarded message from announce-ow...@apache.org - > > > > > > Date: 27 May 2020 17:09:19 - > > > From: announ

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

; something wrong with that, we need to fix that script. > > There's nothing I could do now to correct the announce message > > itself since it has already been approved (by me). > > > > - Forwarded message from announce-ow...@apache.org - > > > > Date:

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 3:53 AM Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:59:07AM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > > On 28.05.2020 07:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > > Someone could start a discussion with the announce@a.o moderators. The > > > escalation path, IIRC, is: announce-owner@,

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 08:13:26AM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 09:53 +0200: > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:59:07AM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > > > On 28.05.2020 07:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > > > Someone could start a discussion with the announce@a.o

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 09:53 +0200: > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:59:07AM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > > On 28.05.2020 07:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > > Someone could start a discussion with the announce@a.o moderators. The > > > escalation path, IIRC, is: announce-owner@,

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 10:02 +0200: > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:59:31AM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Seems to cover everything. I took a stab at a slight reorganization; > > WDYT? — > > Sure, your wording changes are fine with me. +1 to commit :) > r1878222.

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

nounce@ list will be > +rejected. This generates a moderation notification with a Subject line such > as: > +Returned post for annou...@apache.org. The moderator who ordered the > +mailing list software to reject the message may neglect to sign their name to > +the rej

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

; > > +It is possible that your message to the ASF-wide annou...@apache.org > > > will > > > +be rejected. This generates a moderation notification with a Subject line > > > +such as: Returned post for annou...@apache.org. > > > > Spell out that this is specifically abou

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:59:07AM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 28.05.2020 07:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Someone could start a discussion with the announce@a.o moderators. The > > escalation path, IIRC, is: announce-owner@, press@, VP M (= Sally), > > operations@, board@, members@. > > Did

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

d. This generates a moderation notification with a Subject line > > +such as: Returned post for annou...@apache.org. > > Spell out that this is specifically about announce@a.o, as opposed to > announce@s.a.o? > > > +The originator of such moderation messages is anonymous if the

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

to the release announcement sent to the announce@ mailing > list. > > +It is possible that your message to the ASF-wide annou...@apache.org will > +be rejected. This generates a moderation notification with a Subject line > +such as: Returned post for annou...@apache.org. Spell out t

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

rates a moderation notification with a Subject line +such as: Returned post for annou...@apache.org. +The originator of such moderation messages is anonymous if the moderator +neglects to sign the moderation message with their own name, which makes it +impossible to have an actual conversation with the

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

easing.part.html (revision 1878172) +++ releasing.part.html (working copy) @@ -1300,6 +1300,19 @@ Ensure that your mailer doesn't wrap the URLs over NOTE: We announce the release before updating the website since the website update links to the release announcement sent to the announce@ mailing

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

On 28.05.2020 07:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Someone could start a discussion with the announce@a.o moderators. The > escalation path, IIRC, is: announce-owner@, press@, VP M (= Sally), > operations@, board@, members@. Did that about half an hour ago. Let's see what happens. If whoever blocked

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

Julian Foad wrote on Wed, 27 May 2020 21:41 +0100: > Branko Čibej wrote: > >>> On 27.05.2020 19:30, Stefan Sperling wrote: > Out of the blue, I have received nitpicking of changes I made to the > website and the announce message I sent. I've received this feedback > via the

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

ipt. > There's nothing I could do now to correct the announce message > itself since it has already been approved (by me). > > - Forwarded message from announce-ow...@apache.org - > > Date: 27 May 2020 17:09:19 - > From: announce-ow...@apache.org > To: s.

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

Branko Čibej wrote: On 27.05.2020 19:30, Stefan Sperling wrote: Out of the blue, I have received nitpicking of changes I made to the website and the announce message I sent. I've received this feedback via the mailing list moderation mechanism. Can anyone tell me what's going on here? Who even

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

On 27.05.2020 20:35, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 07:48:41PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 27.05.2020 19:30, Stefan Sperling wrote: >>> Out of the blue, I have received nitpicking of changes I made to the >>> website and the announce message I sent. I've received this

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 07:48:41PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 27.05.2020 19:30, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > Out of the blue, I have received nitpicking of changes I made to the > > website and the announce message I sent. I've received this feedback > > via the mailing list moderation

Re: [announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

- Forwarded message from announce-ow...@apache.org - > > Date: 27 May 2020 17:09:19 - > From: announce-ow...@apache.org > To: s...@apache.org > Subject: Returned post for annou...@apache.org > Message-ID: <1590599359.7756.ez...@apache.org> > Content-Type: multipart/mixed; bou

[announce-ow...@apache.org: Returned post for annou...@apache.org]

...@apache.org To: s...@apache.org Subject: Returned post for annou...@apache.org Message-ID: <1590599359.7756.ez...@apache.org> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=lodpbfombmeidpnonnko X-Spam-Score: (-7.5) SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm ma

Re: Fwd: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

Stefan wrote: On 07/04/2018 20:37, Julian Foad wrote: Looks like we should make two more tweaks to announcement email templates - see below. I'll do it, at least in time for final 1.10.0 announcement, if nobody beats me to it. Would be nice to do it in time to re-send this rc2 email to

Re: Fwd: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

to announce@a.o but > I don't think that's so important. > > - Julian > > > > Original Message > From: announce-ow...@apache.org > Sent: 7 April 2018 11:31:15 BST > To: julianf...@apache.org > Subject: Returned post for annou...@apache.org &

Fwd: Returned post for annou...@apache.org

Original Message From: announce-ow...@apache.org Sent: 7 April 2018 11:31:15 BST To: julianf...@apache.org Subject: Returned post for annou...@apache.org Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the annou...@apache.org mailing list. I'm sorry, your message (enclosed