[gnutls-devel] should we deprecate the development ML?
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:
>>>>> 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
>>> 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),
>>> 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
>> 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
Technically not. It's just about people not willing to change to the new
structure... so you might loose some audience.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Gnutls-devel