Re: groups.io mailing list

Michael, I'm adding this comment simply to acknowledge that the current solution

supported by OASIS for the comment facility default (virtio-comment@ ) is not ideal.

I'll coordinate my opinions and recommendations as warranted to see whether

we have good options, and if so, which ones.

Shalom (Shabbat shalom in about 20 hours)

- Robin

PS Chet noted that we are aware of some of the limitations, and we hear _expression_

of frustrations from time-to-time. On a regular basis, I face the issue of

mail server messages (confirmation request messages to users) being

routed to a user's spam folder, of to other location-unobserved, and the

process breaks down. We know that "ezmlm" and the Kavi-supported variant

are ...uh.... er... um... hrmmmm... mumble... " outdated".

I don't know if groups.io is better, but in being more modern than ezmlm, I'd

bet on the odds. I'm subscribed to about 8 groups.io lists, but have not paid

attention to the details.

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@oasis-open.org> wrote:

Hi Michael,

I'd like to know more about the appeal of groups.io. I'm not sure what it offers that leads you to want to do this but I'd certainly like to find out how it might be of use.

However, I must warn you all - Jamie is cc'ed and can provide more background - that soliciting feedback to the TC from a non-OASIS-approved channel like groups.io would violate the OASIS TC Process rules and quite possibly put your deliverables at risk. I understand that the subscribe requirement of virtio-comment@ is off-putting. We have heard the objection before. However, it is by the act of subscribing that your commenters contributions are bound to the TC's IPR mode and the OASIS copyright. By replying to the confirmation message, they make that commitment. By taking in feedback through a side-channel, you leave yourselves open to later claims against the work.

This is not hypothetical. While uncommon, we've had several incidents where TCs skirted these rules and OASIS received outside claims asserted against their work products. In one I was directly involved with, we had to take a work product down.

If you want a less top-heavy way for non-material feedback - typos or observations on how clear some text may be - the TC GitHub is certainly an option. You can offer people the option to open issues or add comments to issues there; that is one of its expected uses.

And again, we are happy to talk about the features of groups.io that are appealing. On a quick scan, it does look like there are features there that I personally would find attractive.

Let me know if you'd like to further discuss.

Also, thanks for checking first. I really appreciate that.

Best,

/chet

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello!
After much consideration, I'm seriously thinking about creating
an groups.io mailing list for the virtio TC feedback.

The main issue I'm trying to address is the subscriber-only nature of
the list which is a big problem for casual commenters: when one sends
email to the list, message is bounced back. One has to subscribe
and resend.

groups.io seems to handle this in a more reasonable way.

But API access with things like tags allowing better automation
with e.g. the voting process would also be welcome.

--
MST

--

/chet
----------------

Looking forward to Borderless Cyber 2018, 3-5 Oct, Washington, D.C.
Organized by The World Bank, OASIS, and Georgetown University

Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393

Robin Cover
OASIS, Director of Information Services
Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink
Email: robin@oasis-open.org
Staff bio: http://www.oasis-open.org/people/staff/robin-cover
Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/
Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.html
Tel: +1 972-296-1783

virtio message