Re: [Debconf-team] Bug#720996: please create debconf-kids@lists.d.o
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:08:09AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> I also cannot see the need to have this list created as
> private-secret-nonarchived. Some preferences specific to each of the
> kids will be discussed, sure, but I really doubt strong
> individual-characteric features of each kid will be part of
> this. Stating you have a given number of kids, of a given age (or age
> rank), or that you want allergies to be taken into consideration
> should not require setting up another -private list. Even worse, as
> you are requesting it not to be archived.
I can absolutely understand why people want to keep the conversation on such
a list closed. I sincerely doubt that privacy concerns and protectiveness of
children is limited to the society in whcih I live, and hearing that this
concern was raised by *TWO* Debian Developers who are interested in having a
safe atmosphere for them (and their spouses) to help coordinate plans that
may, or may not, include timetables and places to meet and such where
children will be present, I don't think this request is off-base at all. In
fact, I think this is by far one of the *BEST* uses of private, closed
mailing lists. And I could probably argue that it's a better use of privacy
and closure than other lists within the Debian mailing list structure.
> Maybe those needs would be better served by not having the list be in
> official lists?
Which brings us back into contention about whether DebConf is a separate
entity from Debian, or a part of the Debian project. Back at DC10, the
discussion was resolved that DebConf is a part of the Debian project, and
exists to improve Debian. At the time, efforts were being made to
coordinate funding and fund*raising* make it clear that the Debian project
feels this way. More recently, efforts have been made to discontinue
separation of DebConf organization from the rest of the project (namely, by
moving mailing lists to the main Debian structure, among other minor
changes).
I don't feel a separate mailing list structure is necessary to accommodate a
mailing list meant to be a lower-volume, more targetted (and private!) list
for accompanying families of a DebConf attendee to help coordinate amongst
themselves.
It might mean that some people who sit out a DebConf won't see what's
happened at that conference. I don't necessarily consider this a problem.
It was also their choice to sit out a DebConf, and they wouldn't need to be
coordinating at that time anyway. On the other hand, they could certainly
join it even if they aren't attending a particular DebConf, but the traffic
on the mailing list wouldn't likely be of interest to them that year.
I just remain unconvinced what the problem of having this mailing list for
DebConf purposes is. Are we worried about precedent set by requesting a
private, no archive list? Are there any other private, no archive lists as
part of the Debian listserve? If so, what reasons were they granted those
attributes?
Patty
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Patty Langasek
harmoney@dodds.net
----------------------------------------------------------
At times, you may end up far away from home; you may not be
sure of where you belong, anymore. But home is always
there... because home is not a place. It's wherever your
passion takes you.
--- J. Michael Straczynski
Reply to: