From mal at egenix.com Sat Oct 15 13:27:03 2005 From: mal at egenix.com (M.-A. Lemburg) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 13:27:03 +0200 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates Message-ID: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> Hi there, it seems that all SIGs have expired ;-) http://www.python.org/sigs/ I'd like to request that the db-sig and the distutils-sig, which I know are still busy and used for feedback on the subjects databases and distribution, be prolonged for another year or two. Thanks, -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, Oct 15 2005) >>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ... http://zope.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ ::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,FreeBSD for free ! :::: From fdrake at acm.org Sun Oct 16 07:08:32 2005 From: fdrake at acm.org (Fred L. Drake, Jr.) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 01:08:32 -0400 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> Message-ID: <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> On Saturday 15 October 2005 07:27, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > it seems that all SIGs have expired ;-) Heh. Frankly, I think the "expiration" stuff is pretty silly. Can we simply get rid of it? -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. From mwh at python.net Sun Oct 16 16:28:29 2005 From: mwh at python.net (Michael Hudson) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 15:28:29 +0100 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> Message-ID: <2mbr1pa642.fsf@starship.python.net> "Fred L. Drake, Jr." writes: > On Saturday 15 October 2005 07:27, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > > it seems that all SIGs have expired ;-) > > Heh. Frankly, I think the "expiration" stuff is pretty silly. Can we simply > get rid of it? +1 Cheers, mwh -- No. In fact, my eyeballs fell out just from reading this question, so it's a good thing I can touch-type. -- John Baez, sci.physics.research From barry at python.org Sun Oct 16 23:17:20 2005 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:17:20 -0400 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> Message-ID: <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 01:08, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote: > On Saturday 15 October 2005 07:27, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > > it seems that all SIGs have expired ;-) > > Heh. Frankly, I think the "expiration" stuff is pretty silly. Can we simply > get rid of it? I still like the idea of culling sigs that are no longer necessary, or that haven't made any progress in a while. OTOH, I'm not sure any of the existing sigs are worthy of retirement. My suggestion would be to tag all the existing active sigs to expire December 2006, but if the consensus is to just ditch the expiration dates, I suppose we can tag them all as "Never" and just deal with useless sigs on a case-by-case basis. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 307 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/meta-sig/attachments/20051016/116f1a4c/attachment.pgp From deirdre at deirdre.net Sun Oct 16 23:30:22 2005 From: deirdre at deirdre.net (Deirdre Saoirse Moen) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:30:22 -0700 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> Message-ID: Speaking of sig expiry.... Can someone take over the mailman duties on this list? I'm really not doing any python work at the moment and haven't for some time. But I am working on seven projects right now and have no time. From mal at egenix.com Mon Oct 17 11:25:14 2005 From: mal at egenix.com (M.-A. Lemburg) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:25:14 +0200 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> Message-ID: <43536DFA.3050101@egenix.com> Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 01:08, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote: > >>On Saturday 15 October 2005 07:27, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >> > it seems that all SIGs have expired ;-) >> >>Heh. Frankly, I think the "expiration" stuff is pretty silly. Can we simply >>get rid of it? > > > I still like the idea of culling sigs that are no longer necessary, or > that haven't made any progress in a while. OTOH, I'm not sure any of > the existing sigs are worthy of retirement. > > My suggestion would be to tag all the existing active sigs to expire > December 2006, but if the consensus is to just ditch the expiration > dates, I suppose we can tag them all as "Never" and just deal with > useless sigs on a case-by-case basis. I'm with Fred here: I don't think that we have a good reason to expire any of the lists. They don't really "cost" anything much in maintenance (except maybe some time on the behalf of the list administrators). I think we should let the list administrators suggest list removal instead of enforcing a expiry mechanism. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, Oct 17 2005) >>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ... http://zope.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ ::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,FreeBSD for free ! :::: From amk at amk.ca Mon Oct 17 16:21:26 2005 From: amk at amk.ca (A.M. Kuchling) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:21:26 -0400 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: <43536DFA.3050101@egenix.com> References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> <43536DFA.3050101@egenix.com> Message-ID: <20051017142126.GC24750@rogue.amk.ca> On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 11:25:14AM +0200, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > I think we should let the list administrators suggest list > removal instead of enforcing a expiry mechanism. +1. I can remove the 'expiration date' table if everyone agrees with the idea. By this point we may also have winnowed out the SIGs that can lapse into complete inactivity; XML, databases, etc. are not topics that will go away any time soon. --amk From barry at python.org Mon Oct 17 17:26:37 2005 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:26:37 -0400 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> Message-ID: <1129562796.6750.5.camel@geddy.wooz.org> On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 17:30, Deirdre Saoirse Moen wrote: > Can someone take over the mailman duties on this list? I've removed you as the list admin and added myself. I'll update the sig database accordingly. If anyone else wants to join me, the more the merrier. (Maybe pydotorg should be like Major League Baseball and meta-sig like the Washington Nationals? :) -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 307 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/meta-sig/attachments/20051017/39dfbf34/attachment.pgp From barry at python.org Mon Oct 17 17:39:50 2005 From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:39:50 -0400 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: <20051017142126.GC24750@rogue.amk.ca> References: <4350E787.3070801@egenix.com> <200510160108.32708.fdrake@acm.org> <1129497440.7369.50.camel@presto.wooz.org> <43536DFA.3050101@egenix.com> <20051017142126.GC24750@rogue.amk.ca> Message-ID: <1129563590.6749.7.camel@geddy.wooz.org> On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 10:21, A.M. Kuchling wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 11:25:14AM +0200, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > > I think we should let the list administrators suggest list > > removal instead of enforcing a expiry mechanism. > > +1. I can remove the 'expiration date' table if everyone agrees with > the idea. > > By this point we may also have winnowed out the SIGs that can lapse > into complete inactivity; XML, databases, etc. are not topics that > will go away any time soon. Okay, since that's the consensus, +1 from me too. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 307 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/meta-sig/attachments/20051017/be8c5906/attachment.pgp From janssen at parc.com Mon Oct 17 19:33:33 2005 From: janssen at parc.com (Bill Janssen) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 17:33:33 -0000 Subject: [meta-sig] Mailing list expiry dates In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:21:26 PDT." <20051017142126.GC24750@rogue.amk.ca> Message-ID: <05Oct17.103308pdt."58617"@synergy1.parc.xerox.com> > +1. I can remove the 'expiration date' table if everyone agrees with > the idea. Yes, please. The Web SIG seems to be making progress. Bill