On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:07:59 +0100 Aurelien Bompard <abompard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I know it's hard to estimate times, but perhaps we could look at > > migrating all of lists.fedorahosted.org (aside the ones that use > > filters and topics) first on the 16th, then start on the > > lists.fedoraproject.org ones after that? Or keeping a status on the > > wiki might be nice so people know where we are. > > Agreed, I'm starting this status page: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailman3_Migration/Status Sounds good. > > Is there any news on when the filters/topics support might appear? > > I don't know about topics, it was the subject of a GSoC project this > year, and I need to as the team what they think of the result. > About filters, I have writter the proper support in Mailman, it only > needs to be intergrated in the web admin UI, Postorius. If the main > migration goes well, the lists being blocked because of filters > support shouldn't have to wait too long. ok. It would be awesome if we could retire the old mailman2 stuff by the end of the year. ;) > >> A link to HyperKitty will be included in the email footers when > >> your list is migrated. > > That's actually not true, many lists have customized their footer and > I'm not sure we want to edit that (which can be tricky because of > character encoding) and add the HyperKitty link. It just seems rude > :-) Yeah, I am fine not messing with that. > > > We should add a status section on the wiki with lists migrated, > > lists not yet migrated, lists waiting for features and perhaps lists > > currently being migrated. Then people can just look there for > > status. > > I'll keep that up-to-date on the Status page. ok > > Maybe we could point them to the staging instance so that can get > > acquainted with the UI if they haven't seen it before? > > Hmm, I'm worried about people actually using it to send email, since > it has a different underlying email configuration, the email may be > lost. True. > There's also another missing feature that was brought to my attention: > some people were using Mailman 2.1's mbox archives in scripts to parse > incoming patches, for example. While I have rewritten the "Export to > mbox" feature, some lists in Mailman 2.1 were actually exporting the > private archive, without any tinkering of the incoming email (no > escaping of email addresses, etc). This is not recommended, and to be > honest I didn't know Mailman 2.1 actually offered this feature. The > only example I was given was on a redhat.com mailing list: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/, and I haven't found a > fedoraproject.org list with the same behavior, but I'll check that > before migrating. Huh. ok, weird... I didn't know people were doing this either. > Should we send the announcement now? Which list(s) do you think would > be appropriate? Id say: announce devel-announce hosted-announce kevin
Attachment:
pgpIcbLYQgAbu.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
