Per the message below, I propose to close this bug because I think this is already addressed reasonably well. (There's probably some room to offer advice to maintainers on how to run the mailing list, but that feels more like devref material than Policy material.)
Chris, any objections? Am I missing some aspect of your original bug report? Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> writes: > My personal feeling is that the current vagueness is a feature rather > than a bug. I think a moderated mailing list is fine *if* the > moderation queue is very promptly processed, but not okay if the > moderation queue is just a place for messages to go to die. > I feel like Policy already strikes a fairly good balance here: > The maintainer must be specified in the Maintainer control field > with their correct name and a working email address. The email > address given in the Maintainer control field must accept mail from > those role accounts in Debian used to send automated mails regarding > the package. This includes non-spam mail from the bug-tracking > system, all mail from the Debian archive maintenance software, and > other role accounts or automated processes that are commonly agreed > on by the project. > and also note the footnote, which directly addresses moderated mailing > lists: > A sample implementation of such a whitelist written for the Mailman > mailing list management software is used for mailing lists hosted by > alioth.debian.org. > This language dates from an earlier bug about moderated mailing lists > from ftp-master, and was the result of that bug discussion. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
