Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

Looking a bit further into the best way to do this - since mailman doesn't have any sensible export/import features that retain list member settings, we'll probably need to make a full copy of the list on the server, and then remove the members of the old one. I'll ask Daniel to look into that next

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On 3 April 2012 07:04, Erik Moeller wrote: > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 10:37 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > > > Will the archives be permanently split? > > Probably -- advanced mailman surgeries carry a high risk of fatal > mistakes (e.g. we have a fancy pipermail URL alias, but the archive > rebuild is ca

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

I don't know if this makes sense, so I beg your patience for my ignorance. But would it be an option to duplicate the archive? Then both the old and the new links will work. It would be a Great Pity if the new list would not contain the archive of the old list. Best, Lodewijk No dia 4 de Abril de

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

> > One other thing to think about while you're making larger adjustments: it's > possible to customize the listinfo page to not be so ghastly. For example, > compare with > . Perhaps

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

Erik Moeller wrote: > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 10:37 PM, MZMcBride wrote: >> Are there any other consequences of a list rename? > > You will feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of > voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. :D A few pages at Meta-Wiki (and

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 10:37 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > It's a matter of creating a separate list and importing the members from the > current list (foundation-l), right? Yep. > Will foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > continue to function after April 7 (as a redirect/alias) or will only the > new ad

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

Erik Moeller wrote: > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Nathan wrote: >> I think wikimedia-l would work fine and make sense. We probably don't need >> an additional list, a lot of the lists we have now are lightly used. > > Picking this up again .. I'll go ahead and make this change on > Saturday 4

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Nathan wrote: > I think wikimedia-l would work fine and make sense. We probably don't need > an additional list, a lot of the lists we have now are lightly used. Picking this up again .. I'll go ahead and make this change on Saturday 4/7, unless there are strong ob

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

Just because the list moderators don't publicly come down like a ton of bricks on every conversation that gets lively does not mean that we are absentee. Speaking for myself only, I'll conceed that I have intervened little in recent times, but that has because I have felt little need to do so. In g

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

I think wikimedia-l would work fine and make sense. We probably don't need an additional list, a lot of the lists we have now are lightly used. I appreciate that Erik unsubscribed from internal-l. I think more people should do the same thing, on the principle that discussions about the Wikimedia F

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

movement-l is better! -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 7971-8884 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Tom Morris wrote: >> The full proposal is here: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l_proposal > > I think there's another way we could slice the cake: > > (a) a mailing list for discussing Foundation, chapter and management > ... Maybe just rename Foundat

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On 1 March 2012 09:14, Erik Moeller wrote: > That new list wouldn't be intended to replace foundation-l (which > would continue to be used for matters strictly related to the > Wikimedia Foundation) or to internal-l (which may have some legitimate > uses, although I personally find it unnecessary

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Erik Moeller wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> That sounds reasonable.  Most things discussed on this list are not >> specially relevant to the Foundation. > > OK. Any strong objections to changing the list name and scope (the > latte

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

> OK. Any strong objections to changing the list name and scope (the > latter being the description at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ) to be > all-encompassing for Wikimedia-wide issues? > > The rename would likely occur by unsubscribing current members from > this li

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On 1 March 2012 16:30, Erik Moeller wrote: > The rename would likely occur by unsubscribing current members from > this list and re-subscribing them to the new one, to avoid breaking > links or accidentally corrupting archives -- meaning that list > archives pre-move would be accessible via a dif

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: > That sounds reasonable.  Most things discussed on this list are not > specially relevant to the Foundation. OK. Any strong objections to changing the list name and scope (the latter being the description at https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

rupert THURNER wrote: > "Amir E. Aharoni" >> David Gerard : >> > Strainu wrote: >> >> If names are that important for you, go ahead and rename foundation-l, >> >> but there is really no need for yet another list. >> > >> > +1 >> Another +1. > +1 That sounds reasonable. Most things discussed on

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Mar 1, 2012 12:12 PM, "Amir E. Aharoni" wrote: > > 2012/3/1 David Gerard : > > On 1 March 2012 10:23, Strainu wrote: > > > >> If names are that important for you, go ahead and rename foundation-l, > >> but there is really no need for yet another list. > > > > > > +1 > > > > Adding a new list w

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

2012/3/1 David Gerard : > On 1 March 2012 10:23, Strainu wrote: > >> If names are that important for you, go ahead and rename foundation-l, >> but there is really no need for yet another list. > > > +1 > > Adding a new list would be largely redundant. Another +1. There just aren't so many Founda

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

Just to clarify, who else has access to internal, as a rule? Trusted volunteers, chapter staff/officers, and the majority of WMF staff and contractors? Richard On 01/03/2012 11:07, Thomas Dalton wrote: On Mar 1, 2012 10:55 AM, "Ilario Valdelli" wrote: I would correct that not *all* chapters

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Mar 1, 2012 10:55 AM, "Ilario Valdelli" wrote: > > I would correct that not *all* chapters board members have access in internal. > > The number of subscriptions were limited to three per chapter, as I know. It was five per chapter, but that limit was removed a while back.

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On 1 March 2012 10:23, Strainu wrote: > If names are that important for you, go ahead and rename foundation-l, > but there is really no need for yet another list. +1 Adding a new list would be largely redundant. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Erik Moeller wrote: > Hi all, > > We currently have this public list for Wikimedia Foundation matters, > as well as a private list called "internal-l" which in practice is in > large part used for WMF/chapters discussions, because chapter board > members are added

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

În data de 1 martie 2012, 11:30, Benjamin Lees a scris: > This proposal seems fine to me, but I'm not sure it will address the > issue you seem to be targeting (that discussions aren't held > publicly). I'll go further and say that further splitting the lists will lead to more cross-posting and q

Re: [Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:14 AM, Erik Moeller wrote: > We currently have this public list for Wikimedia Foundation matters, > as well as a private list called "internal-l" which in practice is in > large part used for WMF/chapters discussions, because chapter board > members are added to it by defa

[Foundation-l] A discussion list for Wikimedia (not "Foundation") matters

Hi all, We currently have this public list for Wikimedia Foundation matters, as well as a private list called "internal-l" which in practice is in large part used for WMF/chapters discussions, because chapter board members are added to it by default. The latter is often used for discussions that i