On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 09:30 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
On 8/27/20 3:41 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 17:41 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
The question for you is what benefit there is to anyone in having Mailman 2 maintenance inside the Mailman Project going forward.
You mean inside the Mailman3 Project at mailman3.org? None.
The Mailman Project certainly doesn't want to encourage new installations of Mailman 2.
Again, Do you mean the Mailman3 Project at mailman3.org and on the MM3- org mailinglists? If so, fine, move on.
I think Steve is referring to the GNU-Mailman project which is the group of people, always small and continuously evolving, starting with John Viega, who've been responsible for the development and maintenance of Mailman since it's inception.
I'm still not clear on what you (Jim) are really wanting to do.
I want there to be a team, and I'm willing to be a part of it, that sees
merge requests and accepts or rejects them as features for Mailman 2.x
based on their value and suitability (not based on fear of any effect it
will have on mm3). JUST Like you (Mark) alone did for all of these
merge requests except for the most recent 1:
https://code.launchpad.net/%7Emailman-coders/mailman/2.1/+merges
I may be wrong on this, but I don't see any distros picking up new versions of Mailman 2.1 unless they come from some 'official' source and so far, the GNU-Mailman project is the only such source. I'm not even sure that any distros are planning to package Mailman 2.1.34.
The distros may not rollout pure mm2.1.34, but they certainly do pick and choose bits to apply to their maintained version. For example, the DMARC and other stuff that I contributed wound up in numerous versions of Mailman as released by distros and their derivatives.
I don't think Steve or I is being 'proprietary' about Mailman per se, but we are proprietary about the GNU-Mailman project,
To me, they are the same. As you said above, distros aren't going to pull from un-official sources, so supporting "Mailman" is only relevant in the context of supporting "GNU-Mailman".
so the question is do Jim and possibly others become part of the GNU-Mailman project and continue to maintain the 2.1 branch on Launchpad or wherever and make 'official' releases, or do they fork the project and hope that their fork becomes the accepted source for Mailman 2.1.x.
I don't know why you think that's a valid question given that you have stated you have no proprietary interest in Mailman. I think it would help everyone if you explained just what you mean by, and any proprietary items you can identify, when you say "GNU Mailman"
-Jim P.