Re: Fwd: Postgres forums ... take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-general

On 22 November 2010 14:05, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 16:54, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> > Elliot Chance wrote:
>> >> > Also, if someone registers on the forum, do they get a major domo registration email? ?And if so, would this be
setto receive no emails upon registration? ?I'm not clear as to how this step would work because, at the moment,
mailinglist subscribers have to subscribe on a list-by-list basis. ?So registration to the forum site wouldn't
necessarilymean they'd want to join any particular mailing list. ?Similarly, could they unregister easily? ?And anyone
whoattempts to post to a mailing list they aren't subscribed to requires moderation, so we don't wish to exacerbate
this.
>> >>
>> >> No they are not registered on the mailing list, but they actually don't need to be, let me explain:
>> >> 1. John Smith has a postgres related question and finds the forums, he signs up and posts his question.
>> >> 2. His post is then emailed to the mailing list under a generic registered address like
"mailinglist@postgresql.com.au"
>> >> 3. Bob House reads Johns question on the mailing list and simply sends an email reply.
>> >> 4. The email reply is piped into the forum and matches the topic based on the email subject (thats how it
currentlydoes it.) 
>> >> 5. John gets an email from phpBB along the lines of "Bob House has replied to your post, click here" (all forums
dothis) he reads the response and is happy. 
>> >>
>> >> This is the best balance of no-fuss and expert response, keeping in mind that:
>> >> * John can still sign up to the mailing list like anyone else if he wants to.
>> >> * All of John's forums communications are in the postgres mailing list archive now.
>> >
>> > Yes, I think this is fine. ?We would need to be more careful that a
>> > non-group _reply_ would now be going to a public place.
>>
>> I doubt people will really remember that. However, the forums could be
>> given a big disclaimer on posts saying that private replies may show
>> up public, or it could even add it to the footer of the message (sure,
>> nobody reads that, but at least we tried..)
>
> Yes, that seems logical.

Elliot, it appears that there's been considerable input from various
parties regarding the forums (bikeshedding in action), but it spans 3
mailing list conversations.  You may wish to set up a wiki page to
collate what has been discussed, proposed and agreed so far.  If you
haven't used the wiki before, you will need to set up a community
account if you don't already have one, which you can do so at
http://www.postgresql.org/community/signup and then log in to the wiki
located at http://wiki.postgresql.org/ .

This way, everyone can see the progress that's been made as it can be
difficult to follow what has already been discussed.  Also, people can
review what you believe has been decided to see if it sounds sane
enough to actually follow.  Just a suggestion :)

And thanks for the effort you have already put into this.  I
personally support such a development.

--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935