[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-team] Closing debconf13-localteam@l.dc.o ?



Hi there!

On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:27:53 +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> as discussed during last DebConf's "DC13 team coordination BoF" [869], as to 
> minimize the information gap between DC13 locals and the rest of the DebConf 
> Team, there was a rough consensus to close the debconf13-localteam mailing 
> list and to have all discussions happen on debconf-team@l.dc.o.

Ah, now it is explained why different people were talking about this
merge soon after DebConf12.

> Food for thought:
>
> * Non-english conversations? Actually needed?

At least not for DebConf13, because we already use English inside the
Debian Swiss community.

For other DebConfs requiring English conversations has a double output:
it could attract more external people and it could keep away local
people, because of the language barrier.

> * Cross-posting headache resolved?

I think that this is the result of a "misconfiguration" of the
localteams.  If we are clear that everyone in the localteam must be
subscribed to -team@, than we (/me in primis) can stop cross-posting.

> * Does it lead to actual improvement of the situation?

I still think that there is material which should not be on -team,
especially given that -team@ subscribers are way more than the people
actually involved in DebConf organization.  So, if we decide to merge
the two, then -team@ will probably lose subscribers.

We will always have localteam lists, if any at least for the bid
preparation.  I had been under the impression that the winning bid would
have its localteam list migrated to the real debconfNN-localteam@ list,
which was/is actually not the case.

> * Redirection from the -localteam mailing list to -team?

This should be done at least for debconf13-localteam@ and maybe for
debconf12-localteam@ as well if we do not close it completely.  After 3
months from the merge we can simply close down the -localteam@ mailing
lists.

> * Archives?

I would simply keep the status quo.

To summarize: I am in favor of the merge.

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca

Attachment: pgp1cMXbFOZeT.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: