Re: Policy for expiring lists WAS: Idea for a secondary list server

On 03/02/2015 11:00 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:

> Having people use the main lists is *exactly* what we want to have
> happen, in my view. This notion that the PUG lists are good for peer to
> peer help is flawed, in my view.

The we just lost a whole swath of community. The traffic is just too
high and if you expect people to manage their digest settings you have
already lost the argument.

>> This is not a solution for new PUGs because:
>>
>> * We're not proposing to pay for Meetup accounts for every new PUG.
>
> I don't get why not. As I understand it, there are resources available
> for people who run PUGs from .US and possibly SPI and $140/yr is not
> terribly much. Further, that's for an organizer and one organizer can
> create multiple meetup groups, as I understand it- perhaps have someone
> who is already an organizer formally support creating meetup groups for
> PUGs? Maybe that's something that .US could help with?

This is a bit more complicated than that. We (PgUS) certainly can set up
a mailman instance but even PgUS now uses Gapps + Groups as it is free
for a 501c3. I don't know that I can justify spending hard cash for
something that is readily available for free. (We would likely be happy
to set up Google Groups under the .US domain though).

>
> Josh, we're not going to be able to provide something like meetup
> without a heck of a lot of development resources. If you're offering to
> build an OSS meetup replacement then we can certainly talk about hosting
> an instance for PUGs.

A mailing list + the ability for there to be a PUGS "event" listing
would pretty much provide everything a PUG needs.

>> Also, I'm only suggesting that we could terminate the SFPUG list *if* I
>> can re-create the list later if something happens to Meetup. If I can't
>> get the list back once it's gone (which has been the de-facto policy in
>> the past), then I'm going to fight to hold onto it.
>
> That's why we can't make progress here- lists can never go away.
>
>> Further, we're not just talking about PUGs; people will also request new
>> mailing lists for other purposes, such as specific development projects.
>> For example, I could see that a pgsql-fpga@ or mailing list could be
>> useful at this point, except that the involved developers haven't asked
>> for it. Certainly if such a list were requested, we wouldn't tell them
>> to use Meetup.
>
> Let's try to keep the discussion to one topic at a time here.
>

The primary topic is a secondary list server because .org is difficult
to work with when it comes to mailing lists. I think it is pretty spot
on to mention we have also wanted other types of lists.

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, @cmdpromptinc

Now I get it: your service is designed for a customer
base that grew up with Facebook, watches Japanese seizure
robot anime, and has the attention span of a gnat.
I'm not that user., "Tyler Riddle"