Mailing lists

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007fd5de339530>

2 posts were merged into an existing topic: Use something different as mailman for

So, to summarize and make clear and understandable what everyone is/will be doing. Please correct if something is wrong:

  • DONE: A mailman (2.x) instance is deployed for > @toka
  • Lists for each circle, plus the global and German will be setup as announcement only lists > @toka
  • The list reply-to email will be setup to a specific e-mail address connected to a POP3/IMAP mailbox
  • POP3/IMAP mailboxes related to each list/circle will be setup > @almereyda
  • A mailhandler, or a specific function within discourse, will handle the incoming e-mails and post them as comments on the respective threads. > @almereyda

To think is, how will the mailhandler know where to post the issues. This is sometimes quite complex and requires the use of VERP or other mechanisms (e.g. tokens) for concatenating the e-mail address (at the moment we are even using a gmail address for discourse, which is of course far from ideal). Discourse does offer this, so it might be simply a matter of making any announcements to lists go through a special thread on discourse.

I would in any case not make the global and German lists as announcement only, not for now. We need first to stabilize/restore the communication before going for the next step. These should be brought up, with the existing contacts, ASAP. Please deal with this before starting anything else.

1 Like

@toka is up and running?

I do not understand the first part of @gandhiano but want to second the 2nd part “setup the global and german lists”

its up and running, but not very well tested

before announcing it to the world, we should do some more testing first

4 posts were merged into an existing topic: Sprint retrospective #2 and sprint planning #3 online meetings

Hi @toka, how can I join all mailing lists at the same time from the same email address via the web interface? Is there a central login to Mailman which allows me to simply click a join button to do so, or do I have to type my details every time again?

Is there any reason why we are not using the <listname>-announce, <listname>-public, <listname>-private, etc. pattern? I like flat namespaces, but I also like comparability. These above could possibly read similar to the pattern the W3C uses

  • Public
    • public-global where is being migrated, read only and moderated
    • public-german where is being migrated, read only and moderated
  • Contributions
    • public-global-contrib where active partners can discuss
    • public-german-contrib where the, meanwhile extended, initial group of #14mmm (the DACH scene of alternative economies) can discuss
    • public-chest for status updates and announcements, read only and moderated
    • public-chest-contrib for contributions to the overall process
    • internal-chest for administrative conversation in the team
    • public-ssedas for status updates and announcements, read only and moderated
    • public-ssedas-contrib for contributions from partners
      Remember there are still threads on the lists. Why we don’t need separate lists for every conversation.
    • internal-ssedas for administrative conversation in the team

instead. The title of a list would in a sense be self-describing its role. The goals here are

  1. to have as much guidance as possible about where to send specific messages once they occur.
  2. to keep as much conversation as possible out in the Open Web.
    Meaning directly linkable and easy to join with a web browser, not neccessarily involving email (legacy and threatening Internet technology) to contribute.
  3. to consider mailing lists as a fallback communication channel only to be used if others (Discourse, Taiga, …) break.

I am quite worried about the dev, log and team handles, as I don’t see any benefit over Discourse’s general notification system enabled by groups like

Let’s just keep in mind every organization of communication channels is also organizing the social process around, therefore impeding power structures. Else please explain to me how you want to create comparability to the circle structure and avoid uncontrolled growth in the same time. Some questions to get the conversation started:

  • What is the difference between dev and team? Isn’t the conversation of the team about the development, thus in contrib channels?
  • Or should all projects’ contributions feed into the same contrib/dev(elopement)/log stream, flattening the overall organizational structure and abstracting away the projects? (Which is good in a sense!)
  • Does log create any advantage over the moderated public lists? Should its Discourse handle rather publish there?

I just don’t want to lose focus and create new organizational patterns which stand perpendicular to the circles/Discourse categories, scrum, the landing page’s sitemap, etc.

I am afraid we might be overstructuring the communication. I don’t see a need now for further lists than the global and german, which replace the existing ones.

It would in my opinion be more helpful to invest effort in automating announcements from discourse (e.g. reports, calls for meetings, hot topics, etc.) to these mailing lists (e.g. by subscribing it to a specific category in discourse).

And having someone, or a group of people (communication circle?) making sure that regular updates are sent to these lists. @alabaeye already offered to start writing summaries of the developments and debates, to share with the larger community. Lets see how much resonance this gets.


I did not find a way to do that. But currently I see my suggestion not as approved so lets talk more, if we find a consent view on it.

Yes. I tried to suggest a simple, announce or notification only infrastructure, whithout bureaucracy and naming schemes.
Imho there should be no discussions run the mailing lists.

I also think that moderated and private lists should go somewhere else.
Perhaps we should even use some different domain ( to make this clear and have normal mailing lists with different policies run under ?

Hm. It seems that discourse improved its notification system (didnt this handles got expanded in the past?).
If yes, then the mail-forward could be just part of this groups.

Our circle names seem to be known only to insiders. I suggested to use some more easily guessable names.
So “dev” -> active monkeys, “team” -> all active circles (can groups be part of groups ?)

The idea behind “log” was to have all public traffic get dumped there. I don’t know, if anybody would like to use that, but we will see if people subscribe themself or not.

Hm. Perpendicular is good, IMHO, since it creates a new dimension.
Parallel would be duplicating efforts.

The basic idea is to add a level of notification to all our public communication, which is not dependent on getting involved in discourse.

Plus 1

Plus 1

@toka excellent, that you set up the german and global list. Thank you as well for the SSEDAS list, but my need for lists was misunterstood. There currently is no need for such a general SSEDAS list.

Where are we in the deployment process of german and global?

  • I tested both yesterday with the result, that my message needs approval by the moderator.
  • What is good next steps, how I can contribute to get global and german running smoothly?

I subscribed the current scrum team for testing.

@toka should we watch out for something specific for propper testing?

@almereyda is the list from the former mailing lists somewhere as backup, so that we can import it, once the testing is done?

In Mailman 2 every list is independent and there is no central user DB. This is apparently different in Mailman 3.

The German list seems to be working, not sure about the global. Could you @toka or @josefkreitmayer update the state of the task to done once you are finished with testing and adding everyone from the old lists?

@gandhiano wrote: "I would in any case not make the global and German lists as announcement only, not for now. We need first to stabilize/restore the communication
before going for the next step. "

excellent point!

pls once you’ve set up the German and Global lists just send an e-mail explaining shortly what happened and that they are now working again and can be used by those subscribed (i.e. those who receive this e-mail)
thanks to @toka for the pragmatic solution


Hello @silke,

would you like to join the testing (just some mails back and forth, to see if it works.)

next steps:

  • test a little bit more (3-5 mails going around), getting feedback on the welcome-message.
  • get the backup from the old mailing lists from @toka @almereyda or someone else in charge of the old list, and import the old subscribers.
1 Like

hi, does this mean that ppl need to sign up again? I.e. we don’t have
the old lists / mailing adresses anymore?

@silke no : )

it is just an invitation now for you, if you would like to join testing. No need to do so, but would very likely speed up the process.

puuuhhh, good news, I was afraid we’ve lost all the contacts.
I am happy to join the testing …

1 Like

@toka @almereyda

thank you for condensing the mailing lists down again to the 2 essentials, that we had before.

@toka what more in testing do we need?

@almereyda, could you provide @gandhiano or @toka with the backups / contacts from the old lists?

How is it actually with Backup-Truck factor? If they are stored in non communal servers, or such, which are not accessible by the other webmasters, that could be fatal.

I think they are by now tested enough and working properly.

Who will add all the contacts to the lists again? And should they be notified on subscription, or the list is simply “reactivated” without notice (well, we can nevertheless give it on an e-mail to all)

pls let me know when the mailing list works again, I would like to put a message on the list