On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 14:30 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thursday 07 June 2007 12:52:00 Mike McGrath wrote: > > I'd like to point out that we can re-org the mailing lists without > > hosting it ourselves. I just want to make sure the infrastructure team > > doesn't take on this, which is a pretty major task, just because 2 or 3 > > people want it that way. Is there general support from the FAB to host > > this ourselves? > > I'm far more in favor of letting Red Hat to continue hosting the mailman > stuff. If we can do it with a different domain, great. But they have a > working setup for mailman hosting, reasonable spam filters, very good uptime, > a working privacy system in place, etc... I don't see any value of trying to > reproduce all this stuff just to be "more free" from Red Hat. Aside from how nice it would be to use lists.fp.o (well, more typing, but "All together now!" is a good reason), there is the single most important challenge. It still requires @redhat.com to initially request a mailing list. I'm not against restricted access for list requests, but it should be by role/position (merit) and not employment status. If the best way to solve this is to pull the list server over the wall, fine. If we can get a hook into FAS and a 'maillist_requester' into listman.redhat.com, fine. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
