CentOS - Mar 2005 - RFE: Please create a announcement mailing list

Hi,

this is an request for enhancement. Please create an announcement
mailing list for security updates and erratas. These things are right
now posted to the normal users mailing list and I don''t think they
belong there.

Thanks in advance,
Bernd.

Am Do, den 24.03.2005 schrieb Bernd Bartmann um 17:40:
> this is an request for enhancement. Please create an announcement
> mailing list for security updates and erratas. These things are right
> now posted to the normal users mailing list and I don''t think they
> belong there.
> Bernd.
The list exists:

http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce

It is just not used and announcements about package updates are going to
this general discussion list. I share the opinion that this is not
optimal. It is much easier to observe a special errata list than this
one for updates needed.

Alexander


--
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG http://pgp.mit.edu 0xB366A773
legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html
Fedora Core 2 GNU/Linux on Athlon with kernel 2.6.10-1.770_FC2smp
Serendipity 18:13:14 up 7 days, 16:09, load average: 0.44, 0.62, 0.70
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url :
http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050324/9a1c745d/attachment-0001.bin

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:15:05 +0100, Alexander Dalloz <ad+lists@uni-x.org>
wrote:
> Am Do, den 24.03.2005 schrieb Bernd Bartmann um 17:40:
>
> > this is an request for enhancement. Please create an announcement
> > mailing list for security updates and erratas. These things are right
> > now posted to the normal users mailing list and I don''t think
they
> > belong there.
>
> > Bernd.
>
> The list exists:
>
> http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
>
> It is just not used and announcements about package updates are going to
> this general discussion list. I share the opinion that this is not
> optimal. It is much easier to observe a special errata list than this
> one for updates needed.
So what''s the sense of this centos-announce list then?

cu,
Bernd.

Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:15:05 +0100, Alexander Dalloz
<ad+lists@uni-x.org> wrote:
>
>>Am Do, den 24.03.2005 schrieb Bernd Bartmann um 17:40:
>>
>>
>>
>>http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
>>
>>It is just not used and announcements about package updates are going to
>>this general discussion list. I share the opinion that this is not
>>optimal. It is much easier to observe a special errata list than this
>>one for updates needed.
>
>
> So what''s the sense of this centos-announce list then?
>
I suggest you read through the list history, this issue has been raised
and spoken about a few times recently.

- K

--
Karanbir Singh   : http://www.karan.org/
GnuPG Public Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:29:33 +0000, Karanbir Singh <Mail-Lists@karan.org>
wrote:
> Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> >
> > So what''s the sense of this centos-announce list then?
>
> I suggest you read through the list history, this issue has been raised
> and spoken about a few times recently.
 I just subscribed to the RH list, seems to be working well so far
until they get the announcements sorted out here.

On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 18:21 +0100, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:15:05 +0100, Alexander Dalloz
<ad+lists@uni-x.org> wrote:
> > Am Do, den 24.03.2005 schrieb Bernd Bartmann um 17:40:
> >
> > > this is an request for enhancement. Please create an announcement
> > > mailing list for security updates and erratas. These things are
right
> > > now posted to the normal users mailing list and I don''t
think they
> > > belong there.
> >
> > > Bernd.
> >
> > The list exists:
> >
> > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
> >
> > It is just not used and announcements about package updates are going
to
> > this general discussion list. I share the opinion that this is not
> > optimal. It is much easier to observe a special errata list than this
> > one for updates needed.
>
> So what''s the sense of this centos-announce list then?
>
> cu,
> Bernd.
Ok ... this has been discussed many times ...

Here are some points:

1.  There are a group of people who want a separate announce list. They
say it it is good because it tracks only announcements, etc. They have a
good point.

2.  There is another group people who say ... a separate list is not
good, I already subscribe to this list, I don''t want to subscribe to
another list.  They also have a good point.

3.  There was an announcement the other day that said we are going to
split the resources for the CentOS Project and the cAos Project.  Which
we are currently working on ... and when that is complete, the CentOS
announce list will start getting utilized.

all this said ... we can''t make everyone in group 1 and group 2
happy ...

The one announcement (if you missed it):
http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2005-March/000001.html

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url :
http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050324/ac969d9e/attachment.bin

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:55:07 -0600, Johnny Hughes
<mailing-lists@hughesjr.com> wrote:
> Ok ... this has been discussed many times ...
>
> Here are some points:
>
> 1.  There are a group of people who want a separate announce list. They
> say it it is good because it tracks only announcements, etc. They have a
> good point.
>
> 2.  There is another group people who say ... a separate list is not
> good, I already subscribe to this list, I don''t want to subscribe
to
> another list.  They also have a good point.
>
> 3.  There was an announcement the other day that said we are going to
> split the resources for the CentOS Project and the cAos Project.  Which
> we are currently working on ... and when that is complete, the CentOS
> announce list will start getting utilized.
>
> all this said ... we can''t make everyone in group 1 and group 2
> happy ...
>
> The one announcement (if you missed it):
> http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2005-March/000001.html
Thanks for the explanation. IMHO point 2 is just people being lazy.
Announcement don''t belong to discussion lists. Anyway as I understand
the problem is going to be sorted out so nevermind.

BTW: The announcement list is not being mentioned at
http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=16.

Thanks,
Bernd

On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 19:12 +0100, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> BTW: The announcement list is not being mentioned at
> http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=16.
>
Exactly ... (meaning, it is not officially in use yet :))
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url :
http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050324/c9564b94/attachment.bin

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 12:21:55 -0600, Johnny Hughes
<mailing-lists@hughesjr.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 19:12 +0100, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
>
> > BTW: The announcement list is not being mentioned at
> > http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=16.
> >
>
> Exactly ... (meaning, it is not officially in use yet :))
Ok, when we''re already discussing the update/errata announcements here
are some more things to consider:

1. all announcements should be GPG signed by a central CENTOS key
2. md5sums and/or sha1sums should be listed next to each rpm filename
3. the announcements should be a little more verbose (include
ChangeLog, release date, obsoletes, advisory id, ...). Use the RHES or
Fedora announcements as templates
4. a web-site like https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel4es-errata.html
should be created

Thanks,
Bernd.

Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists@hughesjr.com> writes:
> 1.  There are a group of people who want a separate announce list.
> [...]
> 2.  There is another group people who say ... a separate list is not
> good, I already subscribe to this list, I don''t want to subscribe
to
> another list.
> [...]
> all this said ... we can''t make everyone in group 1 and group 2
> happy ...
Of course you can.  Create the announcement list, and then gateway it
to the regular list.  This way, people who just want the announcements
can subscribe to the announcement list, and the people who are on the
regular list will receive the annoucements there.

-tih
--
Don''t ascribe to stupidity what can be adequately explained by
ignorance.

Hi,


On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 07:34:22PM +0100, Bernd Bartmann
wrote:
>
> Ok, when we''re already discussing the update/errata announcements
here
> are some more things to consider:
>
> 1. all announcements should be GPG signed by a central CENTOS key
> 2. md5sums and/or sha1sums should be listed next to each rpm filename
> 3. the announcements should be a little more verbose (include
> ChangeLog, release date, obsoletes, advisory id, ...). Use the RHES or
> Fedora announcements as templates
> 4. a web-site like https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel4es-errata.html
> should be created
>
And you''re the guy who pays me my wasted time for making pretty
announcements, right?

No personal pun intended, but at least i do hate most the ''formatting
announcement'' part of this ''job''....

... if you want to pay for that, you better pay redhat, which is making
those pretty announcements.

All the RPMS are signed with the official keys, so it would not bee
even needed to sign the announements itself. At the end, only RPM
signature is important, all the rest is just extra.

my .02?

--
Pasi Pirhonen - upi@iki.fi - http://iki.fi/upi/

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
> Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists@hughesjr.com> writes:
>
> > 1.  There are a group of people who want a separate announce list.
> > [...]
> > 2.  There is another group people who say ... a separate list is not
> > good, I already subscribe to this list, I don''t want to
subscribe to
> > another list.
> > [...]
> > all this said ... we can''t make everyone in group 1 and group
2
> > happy ...
>
> Of course you can.  Create the announcement list, and then gateway it
> to the regular list.  This way, people who just want the announcements
> can subscribe to the announcement list, and the people who are on the
> regular list will receive the annoucements there.
This is silly. Your solution would not allow people to get only the
discussions. Those who want both can subscribe twice. Subscribing is a one
time action, please don''t make things more complex than they ought to
be.

End this whole thread please and get those announcement on a dedicated
mailinglist. This is tiresome.

--   dag wieers,  dag@wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Pasi Pirhonen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 07:34:22PM +0100, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
>
> > Ok, when we''re already discussing the update/errata
announcements here
> > are some more things to consider:
> >
> > 1. all announcements should be GPG signed by a central CENTOS key
> > 2. md5sums and/or sha1sums should be listed next to each rpm filename
> > 3. the announcements should be a little more verbose (include
> > ChangeLog, release date, obsoletes, advisory id, ...). Use the RHES or
> > Fedora announcements as templates
> > 4. a web-site like https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel4es-errata.html
> > should be created
>
> And you''re the guy who pays me my wasted time for making pretty
> announcements, right?
>
> No personal pun intended, but at least i do hate most the
''formatting
> announcement'' part of this ''job''....
>
> ... if you want to pay for that, you better pay redhat, which is making
> those pretty announcements.
>
> All the RPMS are signed with the official keys, so it would not bee
> even needed to sign the announements itself. At the end, only RPM
> signature is important, all the rest is just extra.
Pasi, nobody implied you should be doing this manually. I think the
suggestion is perfectly valid and can be completely automated. As soon as
it is being published an announcement is send out.

We only need someone to write and integrate it. And since Bernd
suggested it... :)

--   dag wieers,  dag@wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]

I''m one of those that would prefer to get discussions only and not get
annoucements because each of my servers emails me when an updated
package(s) is available.  I also get annoucements from various other
sources with Linux errata.  So the annouce list is of no use to me,
but the discussions is.

But like Johnny said, you can''t please everyone.  And I just put up
with it, because that''s the way it is.

--
Matt Shields
http://masnetworks.biz
http://sexydates4u.com
http://shieldslinux.com
http://shieldsproductions.com


On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:00:20 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers <dag@wieers.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Pasi Pirhonen wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 07:34:22PM +0100, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, when we''re already discussing the update/errata
announcements here
> > > are some more things to consider:
> > >
> > > 1. all announcements should be GPG signed by a central CENTOS key
> > > 2. md5sums and/or sha1sums should be listed next to each rpm
filename
> > > 3. the announcements should be a little more verbose (include
> > > ChangeLog, release date, obsoletes, advisory id, ...). Use the
RHES or
> > > Fedora announcements as templates
> > > 4. a web-site like
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel4es-errata.html
> > > should be created
> >
> > And you''re the guy who pays me my wasted time for making
pretty
> > announcements, right?
> >
> > No personal pun intended, but at least i do hate most the
''formatting
> > announcement'' part of this ''job''....
> >
> > ... if you want to pay for that, you better pay redhat, which is
making
> > those pretty announcements.
> >
> > All the RPMS are signed with the official keys, so it would not bee
> > even needed to sign the announements itself. At the end, only RPM
> > signature is important, all the rest is just extra.
>
> Pasi, nobody implied you should be doing this manually. I think the
> suggestion is perfectly valid and can be completely automated. As soon as
> it is being published an announcement is send out.
>
> We only need someone to write and integrate it. And since Bernd
> suggested it... :)
>
> --   dag wieers,  dag@wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
> [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@caosity.org
> http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:00:20 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers <dag@wieers.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Pasi Pirhonen wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 07:34:22PM +0100, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, when we''re already discussing the update/errata
announcements here
> > > are some more things to consider:
> > >
> > > 1. all announcements should be GPG signed by a central CENTOS key
> > > 2. md5sums and/or sha1sums should be listed next to each rpm
filename
> > > 3. the announcements should be a little more verbose (include
> > > ChangeLog, release date, obsoletes, advisory id, ...). Use the
RHES or
> > > Fedora announcements as templates
> > > 4. a web-site like
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel4es-errata.html
> > > should be created
> >
> > And you''re the guy who pays me my wasted time for making
pretty
> > announcements, right?
> >
> > No personal pun intended, but at least i do hate most the
''formatting
> > announcement'' part of this ''job''....
> >
> > ... if you want to pay for that, you better pay redhat, which is
making
> > those pretty announcements.
> >
> > All the RPMS are signed with the official keys, so it would not bee
> > even needed to sign the announements itself. At the end, only RPM
> > signature is important, all the rest is just extra.
>
> Pasi, nobody implied you should be doing this manually. I think the
> suggestion is perfectly valid and can be completely automated. As soon as
> it is being published an announcement is send out.
>
> We only need someone to write and integrate it. And since Bernd
> suggested it... :)
Of course I meant to do as much automated as possible. Sure, I can
offer my help here. If someone gives me some pointers to the inner
workings of the build / publish system?
Is there already something like an advisory id database?

cu,
Bernd.

Dag Wieers <dag@wieers.com> writes:
>> Of course you can.  Create the announcement list, and then gateway it
>> to the regular list.  This way, people who just want the announcements
>> can subscribe to the announcement list, and the people who are on the
>> regular list will receive the annoucements there.
>
> This is silly.
Of course it isn''t.  It''s the way a lot of lists are being
run.  The
only question is how many announcements are involved -- if there are a
lot, as is the case on this list, then that is a good reason to split
the traffic, and make people subscribe to both lists if they want both
sets of messages.  That may well be the case here.

Actually, the whole idea that subscribing to one more list is some
sort of onerous task that people shouldn''t be forced to undertake is
what is really silly here.  :-)

-tih (who is subscribed to about a hundred different lists)
--
Don''t ascribe to stupidity what can be adequately explained by
ignorance.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Bernd Bartmann wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:00:20 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers <dag@wieers.com>
wrote:
>
> > We only need someone to write and integrate it. And since Bernd
> > suggested it... :)
>
> Of course I meant to do as much automated as possible. Sure, I can
> offer my help here. If someone gives me some pointers to the inner
> workings of the build / publish system?
> Is there already something like an advisory id database?
I don''t think so. Not that much is known to me about the inner
workings,
but it brings up a good point.

CentOS could use someone who can foster new projects/developments and
supports those people that offer their services. Someone who manages and
enables people to help. Especially in areas where little has been done or
requirements are already known.

This guy would manage an open TODO list, document a little what is
expected and has the authority to get things moving.

--   dag wieers,  dag@wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
> Dag Wieers <dag@wieers.com> writes:
>
> >> Of course you can.  Create the announcement list, and then gateway
it
> >> to the regular list.  This way, people who just want the
announcements
> >> can subscribe to the announcement list, and the people who are on
the
> >> regular list will receive the annoucements there.
> >
> > This is silly.
>
> Of course it isn''t.  It''s the way a lot of lists are
being run.  The
> only question is how many announcements are involved -- if there are a
> lot, as is the case on this list, then that is a good reason to split
> the traffic, and make people subscribe to both lists if they want both
> sets of messages.  That may well be the case here.
>
> Actually, the whole idea that subscribing to one more list is some
> sort of onerous task that people shouldn''t be forced to undertake
is
> what is really silly here.  :-)
That''s what I meant actually :) It''s silly to change things
around for a
few people that don''t want to subscribe to another mailinglist.

--   dag wieers,  dag@wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]

Create an announcement list

Then use this list as a subscriber to that list with the digest option turned on
i.e. this list will only get the digest instead of each and every announcement.

I admit that I will not sign up for a separate announcement list although I
think that announcements are useful.

Ben

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Ivar Helbekkmo <tih@eunetnorge.no>
Sent: Mar 24, 2005 10:51 AM
To: CentOS discussion and information list <centos@caosity.org>
Subject: Re: [Centos] RFE: Please create a announcement mailing list

Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists@hughesjr.com> writes:
> 1.  There are a group of people who want a separate announce list.
> [...]
> 2.  There is another group people who say ... a separate list is not
> good, I already subscribe to this list, I don''t want to subscribe
to
> another list.
> [...]
> all this said ... we can''t make everyone in group 1 and group 2
> happy ...
Of course you can.  Create the announcement list, and then gateway it
to the regular list.  This way, people who just want the announcements
can subscribe to the announcement list, and the people who are on the
regular list will receive the annoucements there.

-tih
--
Don''t ascribe to stupidity what can be adequately explained by
ignorance.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@caosity.org
http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On 24 Mar 2005 at 18:51, Bernd Bartmann <bernd.bartmann@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation. IMHO point 2 is just people being lazy.
Your opinion is not shared and its manner of expression offensive.


--
     *** e-mail is not a secure channel ***
mailto:byrnejb.<token>@harte-lyne.ca
James B. Byrne                Harte & Lyne Limited
vox: +1 905 561 1241          9 Brockley Drive
fax: +1 905 561 0757          Hamilton, Ontario
<token> = hal                 Canada L8E 3C3

James B. Byrne wrote:
> On 24 Mar 2005 at 18:51, Bernd Bartmann <bernd.bartmann@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the explanation. IMHO point 2 is just people being lazy.
>
> Your opinion is not shared and its manner of expression offensive.
I share his opinion, I probably wouldn''t have worded it that way
though.
  Lets face it, subscribing to a mailing list takes what, five minutes?
  If even.  That''s minimal effort required in order to have a
discussion-only mailing list.  I don''t understand why some people
perceive this to be such a huge undertaking.

On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 18:15 +0100, Alexander Dalloz
wrote:
> Am Do, den 24.03.2005 schrieb Bernd Bartmann um 17:40:
>
> > this is an request for enhancement. Please create an announcement
> > mailing list for security updates and erratas. These things are right
> > now posted to the normal users mailing list and I don''t think
they
> > belong there.
>
> > Bernd.
>
> The list exists:
>
> http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
>
> It is just not used and announcements about package updates are going to
> this general discussion list. I share the opinion that this is not
> optimal. It is much easier to observe a special errata list than this
> one for updates needed.
Agreed.

Paul

Hello,

I am wondering why this topic coming up once more.
There was a long thread last month below, and the list was already created.
It seems to me that a real problem is it is not functioning properly now.

- Green -

---------------------------------------------------------------------
[Centos] centos-announce list?
http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/2005-February/thread.html#2623

---------------------------------------------------------------------
>It''s mainly due to a change in procedure.  It should be working
shortly..
 (It''s the manual not technical reasons).

Cheers,

Matt.


On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 13:06:17 -0500, Ken Bass <kbass at kenbass.com>
wrote:
> Matt Bottrell wrote:
>
> >We forgot to announce the announcement.
> >
> >
> Forgot to announce which announcement?
>  - That the announce list is not going to be used?
>  - That all updates should be announced on the new list?
>
> I''m confused as to the state of the announce list.
http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/2005-March/003274.html

given the advanced filtering capabilities of most email clients, if pure
"announements" had their subject lines prefixed with something
indicitive of
it''s nature such as the word "announce", prehaps a recipient
could create a
filter or rule to process that message accordingly...

just my opinion. feel free to disagree.

--
Michael Weisman

''chaos is merely a function of the granularity of the sample"

excellent suggestion, I agree.

Michael Weisman wrote:
> given the advanced filtering capabilities of most email clients, if pure
> "announements" had their subject lines prefixed with something
indicitive of
> it''s nature such as the word "announce", prehaps a
recipient could create a
> filter or rule to process that message accordingly...
>
> just my opinion. feel free to disagree.
>