[Mailman-Developers] Mailman "true virtual hosting" and Google SoC

[Hans Ulrich Niedermann]

"Heikki Lampén" <heikki.lampen at gmail.com> writes:

> On 4/24/06, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:21 +0300, Heikki Lampén wrote:
>> > I'm wondering about this "true virtual hosting" issue and what is
>> > going to happen to it.

It will happen some time, it's just a question of when.

>> It's not out of the question, although no way can it go into the
>> mainline 2.1 branch.  Ideally, the work would be done on the Mailman
>> trunk for 2.2, although I wouldn't be opposed to an "unofficial" 2.1
>> patch branch if the volunteers were so motivated.  It's too big of
>> project to go into 2.1 proper though.
> Fair enough.

Exactly.

>> > Maybe I'm just being impatient but as I see it, this vhost stuff
>> > should really interest a lot of people.
>>
>> Definitely.  Everyone wants to see it, and it will definitely happen for
>> 2.2.  It would be awesome if a SoC volunteer wanted to take it on and I
>> would be more than happy to mentor the work.  Are you a student and are
>> you interested in working on it?
>
> I'm unfortunately already employed during summer time (would've had
> been an interesting project). Maybe someone on the list is or knows a
> promising victim?

I've been busy with other things, but I'm planning to finish the vhost
stuff some time in June (if nobody has beat me to it until then).

"Finish" would mean that we can go into production here with an
unofficial 2.1-vhost branch based on 2.1 (we probably want this
sooner than an official 2.2 release can be reasonably be expected to
happen).

This planning of mine includes getting the vhost branch ported to 2.2
while developing the 2.1 version. The idea is that we can just use the
official Mailman code by the Mailman team after the 2.2 release.

Practical issues:
  - I need to get the copyright assignment form stuff done.
  - Either I have to learn and cope with svk or someone with
    sufficient karma would need to trust me enough to provide me with
    svn write access.

Then I'd probably best create an svk/svn branch each off 2.1 and
2.2, then start on the 2.1-vhost branch and maintain 2.2-vhost to keep
in sync with my main project of 2.1-vhost.

OK, and first I'd want to wait until 2006-05-23 to make sure there is
no SoC project concurrently working on the vhost issue.

Gruß,

Uli