[gnutls-devel] should we deprecate the development ML?

Tim Rühsen tim.ruehsen at gmx.de
Tue Jul 3 10:42:15 CEST 2018

On 07/03/2018 08:23 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 3:59 PM Tim Rühsen <tim.ruehsen at gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 07/02/2018 02:31 PM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 3:37 PM Tim Rühsen <tim.ruehsen at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> Please keep the list.
>>>>> I actually wish the gitlab discussions were available, archived and
>>>>> searchable on a mailing list. Is there a way to forward them?
>>>>> cu Andreas
>>>> I totally agree with Andreas.
>>>> We did something liek this for Wget2...
>>>> - create a user wget-gnutls on Gitlab.com with email address
>>>> gnutls-devel at lists.gnutls.org
>>>> - turn on all notifications
>>>> - make the user a project member (reporter)
>>> How did that work for wget2? Is the mailing list still used for
>> discussions
>>> outside gitlab? What I'm afraid of is ending up with a mailing list which
>>> is storage for the gitlab notifications, or even worse (IMHO),
>> disconnected
>>> replies on list for gitlab discussions which are not reflected on gitlab.
>>> That way one would have to follow both.
>> We always had bug-wget at gnu.org for everything (user + dev) incl. Wget2
>> stuff.
>> So we made up a new ML wget-dev at gnu.org for developers which includes
>> the Gitlab notifications. And as you expect, some people sending
>> questions directly into the new ML.
>> So what i do is just following the new ML. If someone comes with an
>> issue directly on the ML, I open an issue at Gitlab. If it is just a
>> question, it will be answered on the ML directly.
>> That is no extra work so far for me.
> The workflow for gnutls at this point is:
>  1. Issues and patches can be send via the web by registering (or using
> other side credentials)
>  2. Issues can be opened by sending a mail to bugs at gnutls.org
> <bug-gnutls at gnutls.org>
>  3. Issues can be brought to gnutls-dev ML
>  4. Issues can be brought to help-gnutls ML
> What I'd like is to reduce the amount of places where issues can be brought
> and discussed to make it easier to keep track of.
> Both Andreas and you make the point for gitlab discussions being more
> easily available and searchable. Would a read-only gnutls-dev which
> receives gitlab traffic, address that?

Sounds good to me. Together with (2).

So you are going to make gnutl-dev and help-gnutls read-only ?

> Are there discussions we may have had in the ML that we cannot have in
> gitlab?

Technically not. It's just about people not willing to change to the new
structure... so you might loose some audience.

Regards, Tim

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnutls-devel/attachments/20180703/06911554/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the Gnutls-devel mailing list