develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from July 2000

group lists

Thread Next
Uri Guttman
July 24, 2000 08:37
group lists
Message ID:

i have been following this thread on a single p5p list vs. separate
group lists and here are my current thoughts. i am in favor of multiple
lists but we can easily solve the problem of those who want to see the
overall picture. either they subscribe to all the list or we have a
special read only list which gets a cc from every sub list (mail from
that global list would have a reply-to set to the originating
list). some say they want to see everything for osmosis which is
great. i don't know if i want to so i like the option to select which
lists i receive. it is easier to manage subscriptions than to worry
about filtering on porrly created subject lines. the multiple list idea
is not to isolate the group but to allow hackers to focus themselves
where they see they fit the best. you choose the size of your own

i see the potential for 1 to 2 dozen groups (we still need a better name
for that), each with its own pumpking (who may double as
moderator). also i see the need for a secondary pumpking for every
group. this person would be working very closely with the primary and
can make decisions in the abscence of the primary. others in the group
will be doing various amounts of work. still others will just contribute
ideas via the groups list. and finally there will be lurkers. we may
want only people above lurkers to be able to write to a list. it will be
a simple matter to ask the pumpking to get writing permission.

some groups may actually be in a tree with a parent and several child
groups. this is totally up to how we divide up the projects. since many
of you will at least lurk on most if not all groups there will be plenty
of cross communication going but for someone who wants to focus on a few
areas, it is a way to do that. also i think it will keep the threads in
any given group more on topic and not be as personal which was the big
failing of p5p IMO. all groups should be moderated but very
lightly. only real ad hominem attacks and spam should be filtered. off
topic posts could be redirected to a better group.

some of these groups will be broader in scope and more influential than
others (language, internals), while some will be very focused
(regexes). since many of you will be active in multiple groups, there
will be plenty of cross fertilization and no group will operate in a

to me this solves the worst probems of p5p while allowing each
contributor to work in the way best suited for them. 

this is not an ietf style group setup but a way to organize the
information flow in the perl6 development community. i think this project
deserves and needs a better structure than p5p. creating the actual
groups will be a critical task and should be started very soon. i
propose we start by enumerating the potential groups and just seeing how
that falls out. then we get primary and secondary pumpkings for each
one. we have primaries for the first set of tasks (librarian, list
admin, language, etc.) so we need secondaires for them too.

an important point that is not mentioned much is that most of these groups
are temporary. when their schedule is up they have to be renewed or
disbanded. they are not like ietf which has to keep a group alive to
manage the life of its standard. once we have the mission of a group
accomplished, the maintenance of it could be subsumed into another group.



Uri Guttman  ---------  ----------
SYStems ARCHitecture, Software Engineering, Perl, Internet, UNIX Consulting
The Perl Books Page  -----------
The Best Search Engine on the Net  ----------

Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About