Cross posting madness must stop.

[Mark S. Miller-2]

Comparing <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/> with <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/> and <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/> shows why this cross posting madness must stop. Some messages in this thread are only posted to one side of the W3C / ECMA divide, indicating that some posters only subscribe on one side. These posters are mutually opaque to the posters subscribing only on the other side of the divide, leading to a fragmented conversation. For example, the excellent posts by David-Sarah Hopwood <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/author.html#9879> have generally gotten responses only from the ECMA side. Some later messages from the W3C side seem to have missed some of his points.

Rather than create a list specific to the WebIDL->ES5 language bindings, I suggest an open public list for discussions likely to be of interest to both communities. Are there any territoriality issues one should be aware of before creating such a list?

--
   Cheers,
   --MarkM

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@...
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

[Maciej Stachowiak]

On Sep 27, 2009, at 12:35 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:

Comparing <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/> with <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/> and <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/> shows why this cross posting madness must stop. Some messages in this thread are only posted to one side of the W3C / ECMA divide, indicating that some posters only subscribe on one side. These posters are mutually opaque to the posters subscribing only on the other side of the divide, leading to a fragmented conversation. For example, the excellent posts by David-Sarah Hopwood <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/author.html#9879> have generally gotten responses only from the ECMA side. Some later messages from the W3C side seem to have missed some of his points.

Rather than create a list specific to the WebIDL->ES5 language bindings, I suggest an open public list for discussions likely to be of interest to both communities. Are there any territoriality issues one should be aware of before creating such a list?

Cross posting isn't great, but a brand new list will be missing many people with an interest in the topic for a while until it ramps up. In the meantime, I think both es-discuss and public-webapps are open for anyone to subscribe to (public-html ironically requires more hoops, since you have to be part of a W3C Member organization or become an invited expert). I'm subscribed to all 3 lists so my only annoyance is getting multiple copies of every email.

My point is this: we're having a really fruitful discussion right now, one that was long overdue. While there are some mechanically bad things about the way we're doing it, I'd like to avoid killing the momentum. So let's keep talking this way, as long as we have useful things to say, and until we can create a better mechanism.

For the slightly longer term: I think a list for general ECMA/W3C scripting coordination is a good idea. But I'd also like that to be the main list we use for the development of Web IDL, since any discussion about WebIDL is likely to be of cross-functional interest. And I don't want to make people subscribe to two new lists. Whether we call it public-webidl or public-scripting-coordination doesn't matter that much to me. Preference? W3C can probably set up such a list in fairly short order, but likely not until Monday.

Regards,

Maciej

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@...
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

[David-Sarah Hopwood-2]

Mark S. Miller wrote:

> Comparing <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/>
> with <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/> and <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/> shows why this
> cross posting madness must stop. Some messages in this thread are only
> posted to one side of the W3C / ECMA divide, indicating that some posters
> only subscribe on one side. These posters are mutually opaque to the posters
> subscribing only on the other side of the divide, leading to a fragmented
> conversation. For example, the excellent posts by David-Sarah Hopwood <
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/author.html#9879>
> have generally gotten responses only from the ECMA side. Some later messages
> from the W3C side seem to have missed some of [their] points.

Indeed, I hadn't realized that my cc:s to public-webapps and public-html
were being dropped *silently*, without any bounce message. If that's due
to the configuation of those lists, then it's a rather user-hostile mailing
list behaviour, IMHO -- problems with spam notwithstanding.

A subsequent attempt to subscribe to public-html as per the instructions
at <http://www.w3.org/Mail/Request>, bounced with error "550 Unrouteable
address (state 14)".

Mark, please forward this.

--
David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥  http://davidsarah.livejournal.com

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@...
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

[Mark S. Miller-2]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David-Sarah Hopwood <david-sarah@...>
Date: Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: Cross posting madness must stop.
To: es-discuss@...

Mark S. Miller wrote:
> Comparing <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/>
> with <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/> and <
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/> shows why this
> cross posting madness must stop. Some messages in this thread are only
> posted to one side of the W3C / ECMA divide, indicating that some posters
> only subscribe on one side. These posters are mutually opaque to the posters
> subscribing only on the other side of the divide, leading to a fragmented
> conversation. For example, the excellent posts by David-Sarah Hopwood <
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/author.html#9879>
> have generally gotten responses only from the ECMA side. Some later messages

> from the W3C side seem to have missed some of [their] points.

Indeed, I hadn't realized that my cc:s to public-webapps and public-html
were being dropped *silently*, without any bounce message. If that's due
to the configuation of those lists, then it's a rather user-hostile mailing
list behaviour, IMHO -- problems with spam notwithstanding.

A subsequent attempt to subscribe to public-html as per the instructions
at <http://www.w3.org/Mail/Request>, bounced with error "550 Unrouteable
address (state 14)".

Mark, please forward this.

--
David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥  http://davidsarah.livejournal.com

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@...
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

--
   Cheers,
   --MarkM

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@...
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

[Mark S. Miller-2]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@...> wrote:

Cross posting isn't great, but a brand new list will be missing many people with an interest in the topic for a while until it ramps up. In the meantime, I think both es-discuss and public-webapps are open for anyone to subscribe to (public-html ironically requires more hoops, since you have to be part of a W3C Member organization or become an invited expert). I'm subscribed to all 3 lists so my only annoyance is getting multiple copies of every email.

My point is this: we're having a really fruitful discussion right now, one that was long overdue.

Enthusiastic +1!
 

While there are some mechanically bad things about the way we're doing it, I'd like to avoid killing the momentum. So let's keep talking this way, as long as we have useful things to say, and until we can create a better mechanism.

 

Agreed. Given what you say about public-html, perhaps we should drop it. In any case, I encourage everyone on any of these three lists who is interested in this discussion to subscribe to both public-webapps and es-discuss so you do not miss any messages by people who aren't, and so that your messages aren't missed.

 

For the slightly longer term: I think a list for general ECMA/W3C scripting coordination is a good idea. But I'd also like that to be the main list we use for the development of Web IDL, since any discussion about WebIDL is likely to be of cross-functional interest. And I don't want to make people subscribe to two new lists. Whether we call it public-webidl or public-scripting-coordination doesn't matter that much to me. Preference? W3C can probably set up such a list in fairly short order, but likely not until Monday.

I like the latter except for the length. How about public-scripting? Monday would be great.

--
   Cheers,
   --MarkM

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@...
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

[Maciej Stachowiak]

On Sep 27, 2009, at 4:07 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote:

>
>
> Indeed, I hadn't realized that my cc:s to public-webapps and public-
> html
> were being dropped *silently*, without any bounce message. If that's  
> due
> to the configuation of those lists, then it's a rather user-hostile  
> mailing
> list behaviour, IMHO -- problems with spam notwithstanding.

To clarify, public-webapps and public-html do not silently bounce  
messages. But they do hold messages from non-subscribers for approval,  
which usually happens within a business day or two.

Regards,
Maciej

_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@...
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss