recently we had some discussion on pd-ot, which most of you probably have missed:
the basic idea was to automatically send [pd-announce] mails to the pd-list.
historical background
up till now, there were 2 ways of using pd-announce:
groupA assumes that people subscribed to pd-list are also subscribed to pd-announce, so they only send announcements to pd-announce. unfortunately this is not the truth (there are about 1350 people subscribed to pd-list (including double and disabled subscriptions) and only approx 650 subscribers to pd-announce)
groupB does not assume that all pd-list-subscribees are also subscribed at pd-announce, and therefore post announcements to both lists, resulting in cross-posts for those who _are_ subscribed on both lists. currently 2/3 of the email-addresses subscribed to pd-announce are also subscribed to pd-list. (this does not include people who are subscribed to both lists with different email-addresses)
my original intention for separating the lists was to make "important announcements" available to people who are not really interested in following all the discussion at pd-list. this means, that pd-announce should be a subset of pd-list (all mails going to pd-announce are also meant for pd-list).
the reason why it became 2 different lists was merely technical.
so what?
both groupA and groupB "annoy" a rather large number of people (>100), either because recipients get announcement-mails 2 times or not at all.
the solution could be simple: subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list.
does this sound good?
drawbacks
- people subscribed to the pd-list who do NOT want to receive
pd-announce mails would have to take care of that themselves. (but even this task would be simplified in relation to the cross-posting solution).
- it is still a solution driven by technical feasibility rather than
what we really want to acchieve. (imho, an ideal solution would make pd-lists (un)subscription a matter of (de)activating a check-box in the user-preferences of the puredata.info portal)
feedback is welcome
mfg.adsr. IOhannes
IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
recently we had some discussion on pd-ot, which most of you probably have missed:
the basic idea was to automatically send [pd-announce] mails to the pd-list.
As it reads in the pd-ot archive i support this change. But.
When will this surgestion be acepted or rejected? Is it to be voted on? In other words: what is the procedure for changes (like this)?
best, steffen
Steffen wrote:
IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
recently we had some discussion on pd-ot, which most of you probably have missed:
the basic idea was to automatically send [pd-announce] mails to the pd-list.
As it reads in the pd-ot archive i support this change. But.
i don't feel that i am authorized to do such a change after all the reactions i got (2 times you on pd-ot, 1 time you on pd-list)
When will this surgestion be acepted or rejected? Is it to be voted on? In other words: what is the procedure for changes (like this)?
i think the procedure is to get the (active!) acceptance of the list members. it seems like that there is no active acceptance, most likely because nobody really cares about this.
mfg.a.dsr IOhannes
probably this mail would have gotten more attention if i had flagged the email as "[admin]" and used a more official IEM-account.
IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
i think the procedure is to get the (active!) acceptance of the list members. it seems like that there is no active acceptance, most likely because nobody really cares about this.
Here we go: yes, accepted.
probably this mail would have gotten more attention if i had flagged the email as "[admin]" and used a more official IEM-account.
It is a good idea.
br, Piotr
hi IOhannes
"IOhannes m zmölnig" zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
the basic idea was to automatically send [pd-announce] mails to the pd-list.
i think the procedure is to get the (active!) acceptance of the list members. it seems like that there is no active acceptance, most likely because nobody really cares about this.
do it. i think it is better to get certain mails a few times than missing one that is maybe of high interest.
roman
___________________________________________________________ Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
On May 2, 2006, at 2:20 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
the solution could be simple: subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list.
does this sound good?
sounds good to my ears!
eni
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Enrique Erne wrote:
On May 2, 2006, at 2:20 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
the solution could be simple: subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list.
does this sound good?
sounds good to my ears!
Sounds good to me.
I think we can follow the "wait one week for objections" rule here, that seems to work with adding developers.
.hc
zen
\
\
\[D[D[D[D
On Mon May 15, 2006 at 03:05:34AM -0700, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Enrique Erne wrote:
On May 2, 2006, at 2:20 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
the solution could be simple: subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list. does this sound good?
sounds good to my ears!
Sounds good to me.
fine here as well (as long as the Message-ID is identical so mailinglist-aware MUA's can do their dupe-pruning magic)
subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list.
some users might have set up a filter to throw announce messages in a seperate folder, via procmail or gmail's 'labels' based on from/to:pd-announce; sending announces to the user list in addition, (but sending an additional one if the user subscribes to announce explicitly) would be my vote.
carmen wrote:
subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list.
some users might have set up a filter to throw announce messages in a seperate folder, via procmail or gmail's 'labels' based on from/to:pd-announce; sending announces to the user list in addition, (but sending an additional one if the user subscribes to announce explicitly) would be my vote.
that is quite how i imagined it.
basically the way to go is: subscribe pd-list to pd-announce; set the members of pd-list to no-mail in pd-announce (so they receive the announcement mails via pd-list) (yes i am repeating myself)
i am not sure whether existing filters will still work (depends on how they are set up; e.g. filtering by "[pd-announce] in the subject might still work while filtering via the "List-Id:"-header field might break; i'll test this before switching)
otoh, these filters did not work either with people cross-posting to both lists (well: something did go to your pd-announce-folder but not everything)
my proposal is just to migrate pd-announce to a subset of pd-list: disabling an accounts delivery state can of course be undone by each user if they prefer to receive the mails directly via pd-announce. also, new members (this is: members to be) of pd-announce will not be affected at all by this change. (if they are not subscribed to pd-list too)
the only remaining question for me is, whether i should disable _all_ members of pd-list in pd-announce or just those who have actually _enabled_ mail-delivery.
i apologize for all this rather tiresome stuff.
mfg.asd.r IOhannes
On 5/15/06, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@eds.org wrote:
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Enrique Erne wrote:
On May 2, 2006, at 2:20 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
the solution could be simple: subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list.
does this sound good?
sounds good to my ears!
Sounds good to me.
it's alright for me. like this, it should be quite easy :
[r pd-announce] | [s pd-list]
+++++++ clemos
Hallo, IOhannes m zmoelnig hat gesagt: // IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
so what?
both groupA and groupB "annoy" a rather large number of people (>100), either because recipients get announcement-mails 2 times or not at all.
the solution could be simple: subscribe the entire pd-list to pd-announce (so all announcements go to pd-list and thus to all pd-list subscribees) AND disable the direct delivery of pd-announce for all those addresses that are also subscribed to pd-list.
does this sound good?
To me it's only important, that somehow every mail I send to pd-announce will also reach every pd-list subscriber. That's why I cross-posted announcements to both lists in the past. Your suggested change would make me stop cross-posting, so I'm fine with it.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
-
carmen -
clemos -
Enrique Erne -
Frank Barknecht -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
IOhannes m zmölnig
-
Piotr Majdak -
Roman Haefeli -
Steffen