New mailing list(s)

Max Bowsher maxb1 at
Fri Dec 2 19:00:15 CST 2005

Hash: SHA1

I ran the whole vs. thing past the
subversion dev list, for more opinions.

Basically, the results were that some people prefer mailman/pipermail,
and others prefer ezmlm/eyebrowse(the tigris ML archiver), and neither
group seemed able to convince the other that their preference was better.

So, we decided to leave the choice up to the translators, since we
couldn't decide ourselves.

I've sort of been nominated (by no-one else wanting to do it) into
summarizing the two for you:

First, moderation interfaces:

red-bean mailman:
Principally web-based, with email notifications of new mail arriving on
the moderation queue, and the ability to accept or discard messages via

tigris ezmlm:
Exclusively email based. No web interface at all.
Accept/reject/add-to-allow-list via email.
Has a SERIOUS disadvantage when multiple people moderate a list, since
there is no way to see whether another moderator has already dealt with
a message. This means _every_ moderator ends up moderating _every_
message, instead of being able to split the load.

Second, archivers:

red-bean mailman/pipermail:
Simple, but fast and functional. This list's archives use it:
Lacks a search feature though.

tigris eyebrowse:
See the Subversion dev list for an example:
Its major flaw is that its 'by date' views aren't sorted by thread at
all, and its other views function only over the entire history of the
list - i.e., it is impossible to browse threads, sorted by date.
Also, the thread view doesn't show the structure of different branches
of a thread, as mailman does - it's merely shown as a flat list, sorted
by date.

OK, I set out to attempt to write an unbiased comparison of the two, but
I quickly realized that I couldn't find much good to say about the
tigris ML system.

I truly don't comprehend how some people prefer the tigris system.

Still, I did at least point out the options, so fulfilling what I said I
would do on the Subversion dev list.

I would strongly recommend you go with mailman, and would gladly help
any of the es/fr/ru lists migrate, if they want to.

Shifting now to a slightly different topic, I think the general
consensus was that for the most part, shared communication between the
.po and book translators is a good thing, so we should probably name the


instead of svnbook-LOCALECODE.


Now, shifting
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin)


More information about the svnbook-dev mailing list