Mailing List Archive

On 5/5/21 10:33 PM, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:

> I, for one, wish more mailing lists did have newsgroup access (I also
> wish for the demise of Google Groups, but short of a large explosive in
> Mountain View, doubt that will come to pass). Instead everything is being
> splintered into smaller and smaller forums which many won't keep following.
> And if it web-based, that is even worse -- having to refresh pages for each
> message read, limited to their editors which tend not to preserve
> formatting, etc.
Splintering is a real problem that a lot of projects face. Of course
you want to have a presence on forums that are comfortable for people,
but these days it's typical to have, like Python does, mailing lists,
newsgroup, forum software (discuss.python.org), chat channels, bug
trackers, github, change proposals on a website (PEPs), and so on, as
well as busy "external" sites like the Python DIscord server.

I'm struggling with that for a much smaller project, ain't easy to keep
collective knowledge like this organized and findable without asking
everybody to participate in everything, which (a) is impossible and (b)
the reason for multiple approaches in the first place - some won't do
mailing lists, some won't do forums, etc.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

I will also add that it can get confusing when someone replies to a
newsgroup posting that was originally suppressed to the mailing list.
This has happened as recently as today.

On Thu, 2021-05-06 at 14:36 +0000, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2021-05-06, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 10:43 AM Avi Gross via Python-list
> > <python-list@python.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Chris,
> > >
> > > Given some notice, what stops anyone from joining the mailing
> > > list before
> > > there is a divorce between the forums?
> >
> > Nothing! Nothing at all. That is, if you're talking about *people*.
> > People are absolutely welcome to join. The reason the S/N would
> > improve is all the non-people who post to the newsgroup.
> >
> > But there are some people who simply don't want to use the mailing
> > list, and that's currently a fully-welcomed option. I won't name
> > names, but there definitely are people who would prefer a
> > newsreader,
>
> Pointing a newsreader at news.gmane.io allows one to participate in
> the mailing list just fine without using Usenet.
>
> Not that I support shutting down the Usenet/email gateway -- the
> signal/noise ration seems fine to me.
>
> --
> Grant
>
>

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 2021-05-06, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Pointing a newsreader at news.gmane.io allows one to participate in
>> the mailing list just fine without using Usenet.
>>
> ??? Surely that *is* using Usenet, at least you're using NNTP which
> is the Usenet protocol. What's "not Usenet" about it?

Usenet was a distributed network of computers that transferred
articles amongst themselves using various protocols, and provided
access to readers in various ways (NNTP being one of them).

Gmane was not and is not part of that network. It is a single,
stand-alone machine operating as an email list archiver/gateway that
provides access to read/post via NTTP.

--
Grant

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

> > Not that I support shutting down the Usenet/email gateway -- the
> > signal/noise ration seems fine to me.
> >
> On that I quite agree. :-)

I remind people that the existing Usenet<->Mail gateway keeps the
mailing list software on mail.python.org from migrating to Mailman 3.
I'm sure Mark Sapiro and other Mailman maintainers would like to keep
moving away from Mailman 2. If the gateway (easier anonymity) and
Mailman 3 (maybe better list archives) are of interest to you, you
might check in with the Mailman dev list and see what would be
involved in porting the gateway code to MM3.

Skip
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2021-05-06, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> > Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Pointing a newsreader at news.gmane.io allows one to participate in
> >> the mailing list just fine without using Usenet.
> >>
> > ??? Surely that *is* using Usenet, at least you're using NNTP which
> > is the Usenet protocol. What's "not Usenet" about it?
>
> Usenet was a distributed network of computers that transferred
> articles amongst themselves using various protocols, and provided
> access to readers in various ways (NNTP being one of them).
>
Usenet *is* still this


> Gmane was not and is not part of that network. It is a single,
> stand-alone machine operating as an email list archiver/gateway that
> provides access to read/post via NTTP.
>
It is effectively part of Usenet because the mailing lists it hosts
and gateways to its newserver are peered with Usenet.

I read several gmane 'lists' via usenet, I most certainly don't get
them directly from gmane, I get them from other usenet servers.

--
Chris Green
·
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 5/6/21 9:44 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
> On 2021-05-06, Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> wrote:
>> On 5/6/21 6:12 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
>>> I think you're fundamentally missing the point that the newsgroup is
>>> *already gatewayed to the mailing list*. Marking the group moderated
>>> will not result in any more work for the moderators. In fact what you
>>> say above is the opposite of the truth, as it will result in the link
>>> between the poster and the moderators becoming more direct, not less
>>> direct.
>> It will.
> How? How would switching from a bi-directional gateway to a moderated
> group make any more work for anyone than the existing bi-directional
> gateway to an unmoderated group?
>
>> First, python-list@python.org is NOT a "Moderated" mailing list by the
>> standard definition of such. Maybe you could call it Moderatable, but
>> most messages make it to the list without any intervention by a
>> moderator.
> Sounds like nearly all moderated lists/forums then.

Then perhaps you have never been on a real Moderated mailing list or
Forum. Lists/Forum when described as moderated normally means that a
human eyeball looks at EVERY (or almost every) message before it goes
public.

>> The Mailman software that runs the list allows the administrators of
>> the list to put select filters on posts, or to make certain posters
>> moderated and need their posts reviewed, but most posts go through
>> automatically and immediately. This works because the SMTP Email
>> system have a must better presumption of the From address in the
>> message actually being who the sender is then under NNTP rules.
> The SMTP mail system makes no such assumption whatsoever.

Maybe not be the absolute letter of the rules, but it does in practice.
Especially if a person intends for their messages to be able to be
delivered to most mail servers. At the very least, the email envelope
will have an apparently valid email address, or most email systems will
refuse it. Protocols like SPF will verify that the message does come
from who it says, or at least there is a responsible party that will
deal with things, or that whole domain get put into block lists. Email
from 'known senders' tends to be reliably marked, and you need to
subscribe to the list and become a 'known sender'. Once you have gone
through the NNTP gateway, you lose all of that.

>> Forging it is detectable in many cases and generally a violation of
>> the TOS for most providers (and the ones that don't can easily be
>> blocked).
> Sounds a lot like Usenet then.
Many Usenet providers do NOT require users to use valid email address as
their From (You can't subscribe such an address to the mailing list to
be able to post from it). They might prohibit explicitly forging someone
else's email address, but Nym Shifiting is common and accepted on Usenet
(SOME providers might limit it, but not all)
>> While you could setup a robo-moderator to do a similar thing, Usenet
>> posters will not have 'pre-subscribed' before posting, and the From
>> address is no where near as relaible as invalid From addresses ARE
>> allowed, and since the message comes via a NNTP injection source relay,
>> non-verifiable. This make the job a LOT harder.
> It makes essentially no difference at all.
It sure does. Have you every actually TRIED to run a moderated Usenet
group, or know anyone who has, especially a somewhat busy group?
>> The current setup does put rules at the gateway that controls what gets
>> onto the mailing list, and because it IS a gateway, there are easier
>> grounds to establish that some posts just won't be gated over from
>> usenet to the mailing list. Putting those same limits onto the moderated
>> group itself would be against Usenet norms. This would mean that the
>> Usenet moderation queue WILL require significant additional work over
>> what is currently being done for the mailing list.
> Could you explain what on earth you are on about here please?

I am presuming that the current gateway isn't bringing all the messages
from Usenet into the mailing list. This is obvious as we don't see the
noise here. The Cabal that runs the 'Big-8' doesn't really care what
sort of filters are added at such a gateway.

To setup a moderated group that defines similar filters in place for
messages getting to Usenet, particularly for a group intended to replace
a 'reasonably' working unmoderated group, is likely not going to be
viewed well. In the old days of actual voting for new groups, just
saying you intended to do such got you a lot of negative votes. Not
sayng you are going to do it, and then doing it, might get the Big-8

>
>> If the idea is just to provide a NNTP accessible version of the mailing
>> list, than perhaps rather than a comp.* group, putting it on gmane would
>> be a viable option, that avoids some of the Usenet issues.
> How would that make any difference?

gmane is not Usenet. If you just want NNTP access, but not the problems
of general Usenet, it is an alternative.

--
Richard Damon

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 2021-05-06, Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> wrote:
> On 5/6/21 9:44 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
>> Sounds like nearly all moderated lists/forums then.
>
> Then perhaps you have never been on a real Moderated mailing list or
> Forum.

Ah, the "no true scotsforum" argument ;-)

>>> While you could setup a robo-moderator to do a similar thing, Usenet
>>> posters will not have 'pre-subscribed' before posting, and the From
>>> address is no where near as relaible as invalid From addresses ARE
>>> allowed, and since the message comes via a NNTP injection source relay,
>>> non-verifiable. This make the job a LOT harder.
>> It makes essentially no difference at all.
> It sure does. Have you every actually TRIED to run a moderated Usenet
> group, or know anyone who has, especially a somewhat busy group?

As I already mentioned, I am a moderator of a Usenet group.

> I am presuming that the current gateway isn't bringing all the messages
> from Usenet into the mailing list. This is obvious as we don't see the
> noise here. The Cabal that runs the 'Big-8' doesn't really care what
> sort of filters are added at such a gateway.
>
> To setup a moderated group that defines similar filters in place for
> messages getting to Usenet, particularly for a group intended to replace
> a 'reasonably' working unmoderated group, is likely not going to be
> viewed well.

Have you every actually TRIED to run a moderated Usenet group, or know
anyone who has, especially a somewhat busy group? Of *course* moderated
groups put filters on what they receive, what do you think group
moderation is *for* if not to block things?
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 2021-05-06, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-05-06, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
>> > Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Pointing a newsreader at news.gmane.io allows one to participate in
>> >> the mailing list just fine without using Usenet.
>> >>
>> > ??? Surely that *is* using Usenet, at least you're using NNTP which
>> > is the Usenet protocol. What's "not Usenet" about it?
>>
>> Usenet was a distributed network of computers that transferred
>> articles amongst themselves using various protocols, and provided
>> access to readers in various ways (NNTP being one of them).
>>
> Usenet *is* still this

Good point.

>> Gmane was not and is not part of that network. It is a single,
>> stand-alone machine operating as an email list archiver/gateway that
>> provides access to read/post via NTTP.
>
> It is effectively part of Usenet because the mailing lists it hosts
> and gateways to its newserver are peered with Usenet.

I don't consider that as "being part of Usenet". Being part of Usenet
means that you peer with other the news hosts within Usenet, provide
the same group hiearchary (or some defined subset) and obey the normal
newsgroup control messages.

> I read several gmane 'lists' via usenet, I most certainly don't get
> them directly from gmane, I get them from other usenet servers.

Are you saying that the gmane news server is peered with other news
servers? And that you can read gmane.comp.python.general on other news
servers? That didn't used to be the case...


--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Where's this discussion going?

Let's not get too caught up on definitions or the sizes of everyone's
respective .. newsgroups.

Which of the practically possible options are best for this list <->
newsgroup setup?

Thanks

Steve

On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 6:47 PM Jon Ribbens via Python-list <
python-list@python.org> wrote:

> On 2021-05-06, Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> wrote:
> > On 5/6/21 9:44 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
> >> Sounds like nearly all moderated lists/forums then.
> >
> > Then perhaps you have never been on a real Moderated mailing list or
> > Forum.
>
> Ah, the "no true scotsforum" argument ;-)
>
> >>> While you could setup a robo-moderator to do a similar thing, Usenet
> >>> posters will not have 'pre-subscribed' before posting, and the From
> >>> address is no where near as relaible as invalid From addresses ARE
> >>> allowed, and since the message comes via a NNTP injection source relay,
> >>> non-verifiable. This make the job a LOT harder.
> >> It makes essentially no difference at all.
> > It sure does. Have you every actually TRIED to run a moderated Usenet
> > group, or know anyone who has, especially a somewhat busy group?
>
> As I already mentioned, I am a moderator of a Usenet group.
>
> > I am presuming that the current gateway isn't bringing all the messages
> > from Usenet into the mailing list. This is obvious as we don't see the
> > noise here. The Cabal that runs the 'Big-8' doesn't really care what
> > sort of filters are added at such a gateway.
> >
> > To setup a moderated group that defines similar filters in place for
> > messages getting to Usenet, particularly for a group intended to replace
> > a 'reasonably' working unmoderated group, is likely not going to be
> > viewed well.
>
> Have you every actually TRIED to run a moderated Usenet group, or know
> anyone who has, especially a somewhat busy group? Of *course* moderated
> groups put filters on what they receive, what do you think group
> moderation is *for* if not to block things?
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 2021-05-06, Stestagg <stestagg@gmail.com> wrote:
> Where's this discussion going?
>
> Let's not get too caught up on definitions or the sizes of everyone's
> respective .. newsgroups.
>
> Which of the practically possible options are best for this list <->
> newsgroup setup?

As before I'd suggest that changing the group to be moderated,
or switching to a parallel moderated group, is at the very least
worth trying. There's no obvious downside and it requires very
little work from anyone (indeed no work at all after the initial
setup). None of the objections raised so far have any basis
whatsoever in reality. And it appears even the suggestion that
Mailman 3 cannot be used while a gateway is involved is untrue:
https://mailman.readthedocs.io/en/latest/src/mailman/handlers/docs/nntp.html
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

I do not believe my proposal has reached—or will reach—consensus. It
seems there are some who still value the linkage between the two, and
the S/N ratio is indeed low enough it doesn't warrant changing from the
status quo. Thanks everyone for the consideration and discussion. 

Paul

On Thu, 2021-05-06 at 18:49 +0100, Stestagg wrote:
> Where's this discussion going?
>
> Let's not get too caught up on definitions or the sizes of everyone's
> respective .. newsgroups.
>
> Which of the practically possible options are best for this list <->
> newsgroup setup?
>
> Thanks
>
> Steve
>
> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 6:47 PM Jon Ribbens via Python-list <
> python-list@python.org> wrote:
>
> > On 2021-05-06, Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> wrote:
> > > On 5/6/21 9:44 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
> > > > Sounds like nearly all moderated lists/forums then.
> > >
> > > Then perhaps you have never been on a real Moderated mailing list
> > > or
> > > Forum.
> >
> > Ah, the "no true scotsforum" argument ;-)
> >
> > > > > While you could setup a robo-moderator to do a similar thing,
> > > > > Usenet
> > > > > posters will not have 'pre-subscribed' before posting, and
> > > > > the From
> > > > > address is no where near as relaible as invalid From
> > > > > addresses ARE
> > > > > allowed, and since the message comes via a NNTP injection
> > > > > source relay,
> > > > > non-verifiable. This make the job a LOT harder.
> > > > It makes essentially no difference at all.
> > > It sure does. Have you every actually TRIED to run a moderated
> > > Usenet
> > > group, or know anyone who has, especially a somewhat busy group?
> >
> > As I already mentioned, I am a moderator of a Usenet group.
> >
> > > I am presuming that the current gateway isn't bringing all the
> > > messages
> > > from Usenet into the mailing list. This is obvious as we don't
> > > see the
> > > noise here. The Cabal that runs the 'Big-8' doesn't really care
> > > what
> > > sort of filters are added at such a gateway.
> > >
> > > To setup a moderated group that defines similar filters in place
> > > for
> > > messages getting to Usenet, particularly for a group intended to
> > > replace
> > > a 'reasonably' working unmoderated group, is likely not going to
> > > be
> > > viewed well.
> >
> > Have you every actually TRIED to run a moderated Usenet group, or
> > know
> > anyone who has, especially a somewhat busy group? Of *course*
> > moderated
> > groups put filters on what they receive, what do you think group
> > moderation is *for* if not to block things?
> > --
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
> >

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 5/6/21 11:05 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
> On 2021-05-06, Stestagg wrote:

>> Where's this discussion going?
>>
>> Which of the practically possible options are best for this list <->
>> newsgroup setup?
>
> And it appears even the suggestion that
> Mailman 3 cannot be used while a gateway is involved is untrue:
> https://mailman.readthedocs.io/en/latest/src/mailman/handlers/docs/nntp.html

Interesting. I know the NNTP gateway wasn't there a couple years ago, and I do not see a date as to when that became
possible.

--
~Ethan~
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

My opinion on all this: The volume in this newsgroup is nowhere
near high enough to be worth changing anything.

This thread itself now contains more messages than the recent
neopython trollage that prompted it.

--
Greg

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2021-05-06, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> > Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 2021-05-06, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
> >> > Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Pointing a newsreader at news.gmane.io allows one to participate in
> >> >> the mailing list just fine without using Usenet.
> >> >>
> >> > ??? Surely that *is* using Usenet, at least you're using NNTP which
> >> > is the Usenet protocol. What's "not Usenet" about it?
> >>
> >> Usenet was a distributed network of computers that transferred
> >> articles amongst themselves using various protocols, and provided
> >> access to readers in various ways (NNTP being one of them).
> >>
> > Usenet *is* still this
>
> Good point.
>
> >> Gmane was not and is not part of that network. It is a single,
> >> stand-alone machine operating as an email list archiver/gateway that
> >> provides access to read/post via NTTP.
> >
> > It is effectively part of Usenet because the mailing lists it hosts
> > and gateways to its newserver are peered with Usenet.
>
> I don't consider that as "being part of Usenet". Being part of Usenet
> means that you peer with other the news hosts within Usenet, provide
> the same group hiearchary (or some defined subset) and obey the normal
> newsgroup control messages.
>
> > I read several gmane 'lists' via usenet, I most certainly don't get
> > them directly from gmane, I get them from other usenet servers.
>
> Are you saying that the gmane news server is peered with other news
> servers? And that you can read gmane.comp.python.general on other news
> servers? That didn't used to be the case...
>
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

... ah, but, you're probably right! Sorry. I've just looked at my
leafnode configuration and I *have* got news.gmane.io in there. I
must have done it so long ago that I'd forgotten all about it.

--
Chris Green
·
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Paul Bryan <pbryan@anode.ca> writes:

> Given the ease of spoofing sender addresses, and its propensity for use
> in anonymous spamming and trolling (thanks python-list-owner for
> staying on top of that!), I propose to disconnect comp.lang.python from
> the python-list mailing list. Both would then operate independently.

Hellow Paul,

So now, i think that Evolution should be support for NNTP.

Sincerely, Python and Gnus fan Byung-Hee

--
^????? _????_ ?????_^))//
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 06/05/2021 18:56, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On Thursday, May 6, 2021 at 1:31:28 AM UTC+1, Paul Bryan wrote:
>> Given the ease of spoofing sender addresses, and its propensity for use
>> in anonymous spamming and trolling (thanks python-list-owner for
>> staying on top of that!), I propose to disconnect comp.lang.python from
>> the python-list mailing list. Both would then operate independently.
>>
>> Paul
> Quite frankly I don't care how this discussion goes as the Python community discriminates against Asperger's suffers such as myself.
>

I believe I am also on the spectrum and feel the same way about the fluffy cloud
echo chamber for fluffy clouds that is the Python "community".

This "code of conduct" bullsh1t is getting out of hand.

Message ends.

/Toaster
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 5/5/21 9:31 PM, Paul Bryan wrote:
> Given the ease of spoofing sender addresses, and its propensity for use
> in anonymous spamming and trolling (thanks python-list-owner for
> staying on top of that!), I propose to disconnect comp.lang.python from
> the python-list mailing list. Both would then operate independently.
>
> Paul
>

No way, I have been using comp.lang.python for years, my spam filter
works ok btw.

Regards

--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list