[Mailman-Users] Efficient handling of cross-posting

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

>>>>> Mikhail T. writes:

 > Whatever I code up will, naturally, need to be approved by the
 > project-maintainers. This is why securing their acceptance /in
 > principle/ is important before beginning the actual work.

This is false.  "Open source" means you can do what you like, and
Mailman actually will distribute it for you as a patch on the issue
tracker.  Many contributions have lived full life cycles that way.
And modern version control systems mean that you can maintain it
locally as Mailman releases new versions with a minimum of pain, ie,
slightly more than the Mailman developers would experience if it were
committed to the mainline.

Also, in open source it is rare that "acceptance in principle" will be
achieved without running code or a reasonably compensated consulting
contract with the maintainer to produce the code.

 > As long as the official position remains:

 > [something signed by Brad Knowles]

(*) Anything not over Barry Warsaw's signature is *un*official,
although Mark Sapiro and Tokio Kikuchi have a huge amount to say about
what actually gets implemented.  Brad Knowles is just channelling the
main developers, although Brad's intuitions should be taken very
seriously.  He knows what is is difficult and what is not.

 > If I get something like: "Uhm, interesting, please send your
 > patches", I'll get to work... Yours,

It should go without saying that it's very interesting; this is a FAQ
(although it's not in the FAQ Wizard).  Consider carefully in light of
remark (*), and Barry Warsaw's post about Mailman 3.