[KJ] spam on kj ml

[KJ] spam on kj ml

[walter harms]

the number of spam gets annoying.
can somebody please update the spam filter ?

re,
 wh
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[maximilian attems]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:59:04AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> the number of spam gets annoying.
> can somebody please update the spam filter ?
> 
> re,
>  wh

why does kj ml not move to vger?
those are quite nicely maintained ml?

regards

-- 
maks
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

On 7/5/07, maximilian attems <max@stro.at> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:59:04AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> > the number of spam gets annoying.
> > can somebody please update the spam filter ?
> >
> > re,
> >  wh
>
> why does kj ml not move to vger?
> those are quite nicely maintained ml?

Yes you are right, i am fed up with the Spams from KJ list.
OTOH, linux-ntdev which is hosted on vger using majordomo rarely sends
any spam.

I guess Alexey Dobriyan can answer this question more appropirately.

Thanks
--pradeep
>
> regards
>
> --
> maks
> _______________________________________________
> Kernel-janitors mailing list
> Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
>


-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Jaco Kroon]

pradeep singh wrote:
> On 7/5/07, maximilian attems <max@stro.at> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:59:04AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
>> > the number of spam gets annoying.
>> > can somebody please update the spam filter ?
>> >
>> > re,
>> >  wh
>>
>> why does kj ml not move to vger?
>> those are quite nicely maintained ml?
> 
> Yes you are right, i am fed up with the Spams from KJ list.
> OTOH, linux-ntdev which is hosted on vger using majordomo rarely sends
> any spam.

I wouldn't be able to say anything for the lists on vger, but I have to 
agree, this list is just about the only source of email based SPAM I 
have left, it would be nice if it too can be eliminated.

Whilst we're on the topic of spam, our local LUG have recently been 
having issues with wiki spam (I've personally had to delete 35 pages 
last night, and revert various edits) - what measures are in place to 
protect the KJ wiki?

Jaco
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Rene Herman]

On 07/05/2007 11:38 AM, pradeep singh wrote:

> Yes you are right, i am fed up with the Spams from KJ list. OTOH,
> linux-ntdev which is hosted on vger using majordomo rarely sends any
> spam.
> 
> I guess Alexey Dobriyan can answer this question more appropirately.

If the list isn't moving to somewhere like vger -- alsa-devel recently 
became a moderated list for non-subscribers and I guess you guys could do 
the same. The moderation (again, only for non-subscribers) doesn't need a 
huge amount of time and moderator roles can be handed out to anyone, not 
just list owners or anything like that. Works via web-interface and 
(optionally, I suppose) via email notifications...

Rene.
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

On 7/5/07, Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/05/2007 11:38 AM, pradeep singh wrote:
>
> > Yes you are right, i am fed up with the Spams from KJ list. OTOH,
> > linux-ntdev which is hosted on vger using majordomo rarely sends any
> > spam.
> >
> > I guess Alexey Dobriyan can answer this question more appropirately.
>
> If the list isn't moving to somewhere like vger -- alsa-devel recently
> became a moderated list for non-subscribers and I guess you guys could do
> the same. The moderation (again, only for non-subscribers) doesn't need a
> huge amount of time and moderator roles can be handed out to anyone, not
> just list owners or anything like that. Works via web-interface and
> (optionally, I suppose) via email notifications...

ok can we frame some consensus on how subscribers should be validated
the frist time??

My suggestions :-

1. Include a captcha kind of thing while registering, may be like how
much is 34+ 34 = or something like this.. It would be even easy to
implement guess.
2. Stop non subscribers from sending any mail to the list.
3. Anyone who sends HTML is removed and need to resubscribe.
4. Have a spamassasin server up[this may be not easy] and keep it updated.
5. we all re-register using these rules to dafeguard the KJ list.

Sugegstions?

Thanks
>
> Rene.
>


-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

On 7/5/07, Jaco Kroon <jaco@kroon.co.za> wrote:
> pradeep singh wrote:
> > On 7/5/07, maximilian attems <max@stro.at> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:59:04AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> >> > the number of spam gets annoying.
> >> > can somebody please update the spam filter ?
> >> >
> >> > re,
> >> >  wh
> >>
> >> why does kj ml not move to vger?
> >> those are quite nicely maintained ml?
> >
> > Yes you are right, i am fed up with the Spams from KJ list.
> > OTOH, linux-ntdev which is hosted on vger using majordomo rarely sends
> > any spam.
>
> I wouldn't be able to say anything for the lists on vger, but I have to
> agree, this list is just about the only source of email based SPAM I
> have left, it would be nice if it too can be eliminated.
>
> Whilst we're on the topic of spam, our local LUG have recently been
> having issues with wiki spam (I've personally had to delete 35 pages
> last night, and revert various edits) - what measures are in place to
> protect the KJ wiki?

Make important pages immutable.
Any edits to the wiki do not reflect util approved by the page
owner(s) or moderator(s).

Is it fair enough?

Thanks
>
> Jaco
>


-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[walter harms]

Hello List,
please note that the spam notice went to the list-owner. I did a cc to the list
in the assumption that more people are interested in removing the spam.

re,
 wh


pradeep singh wrote:
> On 7/5/07, maximilian attems <max@stro.at> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:59:04AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
>> > the number of spam gets annoying.
>> > can somebody please update the spam filter ?
>> >
>> > re,
>> >  wh
>>
>> why does kj ml not move to vger?
>> those are quite nicely maintained ml?
> 
> Yes you are right, i am fed up with the Spams from KJ list.
> OTOH, linux-ntdev which is hosted on vger using majordomo rarely sends
> any spam.
> 
> I guess Alexey Dobriyan can answer this question more appropirately.
> 
> Thanks
> --pradeep
>>
>> regards
>>
>> -- 
>> maks
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kernel-janitors mailing list
>> Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
>> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
>>
> 
> 
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Rene Herman]

On 07/05/2007 12:08 PM, pradeep singh wrote:

> On 7/5/07, Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com> wrote:

>> If the list isn't moving to somewhere like vger -- alsa-devel recently
>> became a moderated list for non-subscribers and I guess you guys could do
>> the same. The moderation (again, only for non-subscribers) doesn't need a
>> huge amount of time and moderator roles can be handed out to anyone, not
>> just list owners or anything like that. Works via web-interface and
>> (optionally, I suppose) via email notifications...
> 
> ok can we frame some consensus on how subscribers should be validated the
> frist time??
> 
> My suggestions :-
> 
> 1. Include a captcha kind of thing while registering, may be like how 
> much is 34+ 34 = or something like this.. It would be even easy to 
> implement guess.

This is not necesary. alsa-devel hasn't seen any spammers subscribe the last 
few months. If it turns out at some point spammers are doing so that's early 
enough.

> 2. Stop non subscribers from sending any mail to the list.

No, do not do that. As said, just make it _moderated_ for non-subscribers. 
On occasion a thread may want to be crossposted to linux-kernel and the 
subscribers there expect open access. Don't trade spam annoyances for 
spam-warring annoyances. As a moderator, you can elect to add From addresses 
to a approves/denies database or, better, just accept them manually and 
possibly send the poster a private message asking to subscribe.

As said, you can hand moderator privileges out as the only administrative 
list power, so just gather up a few volunteers. There should be enough on 
the kernel janitors list I believe (I'm not).

> 3. Anyone who sends HTML is removed and need to resubscribe.

No, do not do that. You may want to let through a well-meaning post from a 
newbie and then just give him or her the, preferably friendly, _advice_ on 
how to post. This can even be a per-case moderator decision if you let HTML 
mail end up in the moderation queue...

> 4. Have a spamassasin server up[this may be not easy] and keep it updated.

Ofcourse, a first run through a spam-filter where everything that is marked 
as spam with a high enough (define yourself..) probability doesn't even end 
up in the moderation queue is good.

You'd be surprised how easy it is to spot the remaining spam for a human 
from the subjects alone -- ie, moderators can deal with the remaining stuff 
with ease.

> 5. we all re-register using these rules to dafeguard the KJ list.

No need for anyone to resubscribe (unless owners here would like to cleanup 
the database and filter dead subscribers while they're at it)

Rene.
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[maximilian attems]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 11:15:58AM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:59:04AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> > the number of spam gets annoying.
> > can somebody please update the spam filter ?
> > 
> > re,
> >  wh
> 
> why does kj ml not move to vger?
> those are quite nicely maintained ml?

instead of making kernel-janitor the next subscriber closed base,
which seems quite against it's intention. i'd suggest asking Randy
and davem if they could do the mv. afair Randy set up the original
osdl ml and davem easily adds linux related projects to vger?

and there seems a consensus that vger is good for the kernel-janitor
list.

--
maks
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

On 7/5/07, Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > ok can we frame some consensus on how subscribers should be validated the
> > frist time??
> >
> > My suggestions :-
> >
> > 1. Include a captcha kind of thing while registering, may be like how
> > much is 34+ 34 = or something like this.. It would be even easy to
> > implement guess.
>
> This is not necesary. alsa-devel hasn't seen any spammers subscribe the last
> few months. If it turns out at some point spammers are doing so that's early
> enough.
Ok, fair enough if a spam free list can be framed. :)
>
> > 2. Stop non subscribers from sending any mail to the list.
>
> No, do not do that. As said, just make it _moderated_ for non-subscribers.
> On occasion a thread may want to be crossposted to linux-kernel and the
> subscribers there expect open access. Don't trade spam annoyances for
> spam-warring annoyances. As a moderator, you can elect to add From addresses
> to a approves/denies database or, better, just accept them manually and
> possibly send the poster a private message asking to subscribe.
>
Fair enough, let non-subscribers post then.
Why even send a private message to subscribe then i guess?

> As said, you can hand moderator privileges out as the only administrative
> list power, so just gather up a few volunteers. There should be enough on
> the kernel janitors list I believe (I'm not).
This can be tricky IMHO.
How you identify whom to give priviliges.
What are the rules? etc etc .

>
> > 3. Anyone who sends HTML is removed and need to resubscribe.
>
> No, do not do that. You may want to let through a well-meaning post from a
> newbie and then just give him or her the, preferably friendly, _advice_ on
> how to post. This can even be a per-case moderator decision if you let HTML
> mail end up in the moderation queue...

Ok.
>
> > 4. Have a spamassasin server up[this may be not easy] and keep it updated.
>
> Ofcourse, a first run through a spam-filter where everything that is marked
> as spam with a high enough (define yourself..) probability doesn't even end
> up in the moderation queue is good.
>
> You'd be surprised how easy it is to spot the remaining spam for a human
> from the subjects alone -- ie, moderators can deal with the remaining stuff
> with ease.

Same point applies here.
identification of the moderators and subswquent chaos like, what if X
moderator remains inactive for a long period...
all boils down to some rules. right?
>
> > 5. we all re-register using these rules to dafeguard the KJ list.
>
> No need for anyone to resubscribe (unless owners here would like to cleanup
> the database and filter dead subscribers while they're at it)

Yeah, lets leave that to the list owner.

Thanks
-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Rene Herman]

On 07/05/2007 02:11 PM, pradeep singh wrote:

>> > 2. Stop non subscribers from sending any mail to the list.
>>
>> No, do not do that. As said, just make it _moderated_ for 
>> non-subscribers. On occasion a thread may want to be crossposted to
>> linux-kernel and the subscribers there expect open access. Don't trade
>> spam annoyances for spam-warring annoyances. As a moderator, you can
>> elect to add From addresses to a approves/denies database or, better,
>> just accept them manually and possibly send the poster a private
>> message asking to subscribe.
>>
> Fair enough, let non-subscribers post then.
> Why even send a private message to subscribe then i guess?

Moderation introduces an inevitable delay even if with enough moderators it 
wouldn't be a large delay. Still an undesirable thing though so if I see 
from a moderated message that it's destined specifically for the alsa-devel 
list and is not one where it's just CCed as "catch-all sound thing CC" I 
tend to reply to the poster privately informing of the subscribtion policy 
and pointing out the delay. Ofcourse, fewer non-subscriber posts also means 
fewer things to moderate...

>> As said, you can hand moderator privileges out as the only administrative
>> list power, so just gather up a few volunteers. There should be enough on
>> the kernel janitors list I believe (I'm not).
> 
> This can be tricky IMHO. How you identify whom to give priviliges. What
> are the rules? etc etc 

You ask who wants to and would like the more active members to volunteer. 
The rules would be "if (spam) reject(); else accept();" where "spam" is 
pretty tightly defined. Remember -- the moderators would've been put in 
place just as human spam filters, not as topic police so the rules are 
pretty darn simple.

>> > 4. Have a spamassasin server up[this may be not easy] and keep it 
>> updated.
>>
>> Ofcourse, a first run through a spam-filter where everything that is 
>> marked as spam with a high enough (define yourself..) probability
>> doesn't even end up in the moderation queue is good.
>>
>> You'd be surprised how easy it is to spot the remaining spam for a human
>> from the subjects alone -- ie, moderators can deal with the remaining 
>> stuff  with ease.
> 
> Same point applies here.
> identification of the moderators and subswquent chaos like, what if X
> moderator remains inactive for a long period...
> all boils down to some rules. right?

Rule 1 -- trust people to get it right unless proven otherwise. I believe 
you overestimate the amount of trouble non-subscriber moderation would be. 
kernel-janitors sees less traffic than alsa-devel, and  _much_ less from 
non-subscribers (it's not a topic list to CC wen you're not doing specific 
janitor stuff) and if some of the more active articipants here would 
volunteer I believe things should readily work themselves out.

List-owner has to ask and set things up...

Rene.

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Jaco Kroon]

Rene Herman wrote:
> On 07/05/2007 02:11 PM, pradeep singh wrote:
> 
>>> > 2. Stop non subscribers from sending any mail to the list.
>>>
>>> No, do not do that. As said, just make it _moderated_ for 
>>> non-subscribers. On occasion a thread may want to be crossposted to
>>> linux-kernel and the subscribers there expect open access. Don't trade
>>> spam annoyances for spam-warring annoyances. As a moderator, you can
>>> elect to add From addresses to a approves/denies database or, better,
>>> just accept them manually and possibly send the poster a private
>>> message asking to subscribe.
>>>
>> Fair enough, let non-subscribers post then.
>> Why even send a private message to subscribe then i guess?
> 
> Moderation introduces an inevitable delay even if with enough moderators 
> it wouldn't be a large delay. Still an undesirable thing though so if I 
> see from a moderated message that it's destined specifically for the 
> alsa-devel list and is not one where it's just CCed as "catch-all sound 
> thing CC" I tend to reply to the poster privately informing of the 
> subscribtion policy and pointing out the delay. Ofcourse, fewer 
> non-subscriber posts also means fewer things to moderate...

Yes, it introduces a delay.  So here are a few further suggestions:

use dns blacklists to filter out any IP ranges within a DUL.  This 
elimates a _lot_ of spam.  Also, there are known "bad" servers out 
there, DNS BLs can also help filtering these out.  These checks are 
pretty cheap, and it's accuracy is just about perfect (most of the 
time).  I personally add a server to a local allow list periodically 
when I find that ISPs get blacklisted, this is usually done upon request 
when an email is sent to postmaster@ for the domain in question and I've 
talked to the ISP to make sure that they shouldn't be on the list. 
Users complains to their ISPs pretty quickly when mail starts bouncing.

Perform sender-callout verifications.  This filters out a _lot_ of SPAM.

Block bounces from going to the list (A lot of spam seem to have a NULL 
return path but then puts an address in the From: header).  Bounces have 
no reason to go to the list as the list return path has a -bounces appended.

Checks on the email addresses listed in headers like To: and From: to 
ensure they are formatted correctly.  This also seems to be highly 
effective, and not that costly.

Greylisting?  Annoying, but it mostly helps to filter out many of the 
"drop and run" spam bots (although, these generally tend to only help on 
the DUL ranges anyway).

If after that we still get too much spam, then set up spamassassin as 
well, get some extra rules from SARE, my SA seems to function well with 
the reject required score set to 7, in the six months where I trialled 
it I didn't get many legit messages going over that, and those that did 
I really didn't want to receive anyway (receive and forward type spam). 
  And were always HTML-based mail (which we are against anyway).

Note, none of these checks rely on spamassassin.  Spamassassin, whilst 
pretty effective is a resource consumer like few others things I've 
worked with.  Try to filter out as much stuff as possible _before_ 
passing messages to spamassassin.

>>> As said, you can hand moderator privileges out as the only 
>>> administrative
>>> list power, so just gather up a few volunteers. There should be 
>>> enough on
>>> the kernel janitors list I believe (I'm not).
>>
>> This can be tricky IMHO. How you identify whom to give priviliges. What
>> are the rules? etc etc 
> 
> You ask who wants to and would like the more active members to 
> volunteer. The rules would be "if (spam) reject(); else accept();" where 
> "spam" is pretty tightly defined. Remember -- the moderators would've 
> been put in place just as human spam filters, not as topic police so the 
> rules are pretty darn simple.

I would keep this as a last step.  Or simply put a "human check" in 
place, ie, if this person hasn't sent mail to the list before, just send 
him/her an email, asking to respond to a link, after clicking this link, 
the email is allowed to pass through.  Not sure if either ezlm, 
majordomo or mailman supports this out of the box though.

>>> > 4. Have a spamassasin server up[this may be not easy] and keep it 
>>> updated.

Yes, sa-update is not that difficult to put in a cron job on a daily 
basis, and to just restart spamd when it's done.

>>> Ofcourse, a first run through a spam-filter where everything that is 
>>> marked as spam with a high enough (define yourself..) probability
>>> doesn't even end up in the moderation queue is good.
>>>
>>> You'd be surprised how easy it is to spot the remaining spam for a human
>>> from the subjects alone -- ie, moderators can deal with the remaining 
>>> stuff  with ease.
>>
>> Same point applies here.
>> identification of the moderators and subswquent chaos like, what if X
>> moderator remains inactive for a long period...
>> all boils down to some rules. right?
> 
> Rule 1 -- trust people to get it right unless proven otherwise. I 
> believe you overestimate the amount of trouble non-subscriber moderation 
> would be. kernel-janitors sees less traffic than alsa-devel, and  _much_ 
> less from non-subscribers (it's not a topic list to CC wen you're not 
> doing specific janitor stuff) and if some of the more active articipants 
> here would volunteer I believe things should readily work themselves out.

I agree, however, stay away from human intervention as far as possible. 
  I used to do this for our local LUG ... it eventually becomes a full 
time job in it's own right.  Also, even with notifications to the 
moderators, what happens if none of them looks for three days?  No, 
imho, rather just filter as much of the crap automatically as possible, 
and let the rest come.  It should be much reduced, if it's still too 
much, then we can take further action.

Jaco
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Randy Dunlap]

maximilian attems wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 11:15:58AM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:59:04AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
>>> the number of spam gets annoying.
>>> can somebody please update the spam filter ?
>>>
>>> re,
>>>  wh
>> why does kj ml not move to vger?
>> those are quite nicely maintained ml?
> 
> instead of making kernel-janitor the next subscriber closed base,
> which seems quite against it's intention. i'd suggest asking Randy
> and davem if they could do the mv. afair Randy set up the original
> osdl ml and davem easily adds linux related projects to vger?

I probably did set it up at OSDL, but I don't have admin access
to it now.  Alexey is listed as the admin:
Kernel-janitors list run by adobriyan at gmail.com

Yes, I'd be happy to see it moved to vger.

> and there seems a consensus that vger is good for the kernel-janitor
> list.
> 
> --
> maks


-- 
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[David Miller]

From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:53:00 -0700

> Yes, I'd be happy to see it moved to vger.

kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org has been created.

In keeping with how this is handled in every other instance
in the past, I am not going to allow the existing subscriber
list to be propagated wholesale to the vger list.

Forcing people to subscribe to the new list serves several
purposes, none the least of which is that people test out that
their path to vger works bi-directionally.

If I were to simply copy the subscribers over by hand, half
the list would bounce in the first posting and I refuse to
sift through that. :)

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On 7/5/07, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:53:00 -0700
>
> > Yes, I'd be happy to see it moved to vger.
>
> kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org has been created.
>
> In keeping with how this is handled in every other instance
> in the past, I am not going to allow the existing subscriber
> list to be propagated wholesale to the vger list.
>
> Forcing people to subscribe to the new list serves several
> purposes, none the least of which is that people test out that
> their path to vger works bi-directionally.
>
> If I were to simply copy the subscribers over by hand, half
> the list would bounce in the first posting and I refuse to
> sift through that. :)

Thanks Dave!

/me goes and subscribes to the new list.

- Arnaldo
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

On 7/6/07, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:53:00 -0700
>
> > Yes, I'd be happy to see it moved to vger.
>
> kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org has been created.

Kudos to you Dave.
Thanks a lot.
-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

On 7/6/07, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:53:00 -0700
>
> > Yes, I'd be happy to see it moved to vger.
>
> kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org has been created.

A small query Dave.
Is it ok to be subscribed to KJ lists on both osdl and vger lists?
If i unsubscribe from the osdl's KJ list and subscribe to vger's, i
will not miss any message i hope?

Thanks once again.
--pradeep
>
> In keeping with how this is handled in every other instance
> in the past, I am not going to allow the existing subscriber
> list to be propagated wholesale to the vger list.
>
> Forcing people to subscribe to the new list serves several
> purposes, none the least of which is that people test out that
> their path to vger works bi-directionally.
>
> If I were to simply copy the subscribers over by hand, half
> the list would bounce in the first posting and I refuse to
> sift through that. :)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kernel-janitors mailing list
> Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
>


-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On 7/6/07, pradeep singh <pradeep.rautela@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/6/07, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> > From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> > Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:53:00 -0700
> >
> > > Yes, I'd be happy to see it moved to vger.
> >
> > kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org has been created.
>
> A small query Dave.
> Is it ok to be subscribed to KJ lists on both osdl and vger lists?
> If i unsubscribe from the osdl's KJ list and subscribe to vger's, i
> will not miss any message i hope?

Erm... I don't think so.

We should subscribe to the new list and allow for a transition period
were some people will still send messages to the old list, kindly
telling them to stop doing so and instead post to the new list.

- Arnaldo
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On 7/6/07, pradeep singh <pradeep.rautela@gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> > >
> > > A small query Dave.
> > > Is it ok to be subscribed to KJ lists on both osdl and vger lists?
> > > If i unsubscribe from the osdl's KJ list and subscribe to vger's, i
> > > will not miss any message i hope?
> >
> > Erm... I don't think so.
> >
> > We should subscribe to the new list and allow for a transition period
> > were some people will still send messages to the old list, kindly
> > telling them to stop doing so and instead post to the new list.

> Fair enough. This means i need to send a message to both KJ lists?

I guess its OK for a few days, but please add something like:

-----------
WARNING: please subscribe to kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, by
sending a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with "subscribe
kernel-janitors" in the message body, kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
will be soon terminated, hasta la vista, baby!
-----------

At the end of the message to provide for ample warning about the
mailing list move 8-)

- Arnaldo
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

[snip]
> >
> > A small query Dave.
> > Is it ok to be subscribed to KJ lists on both osdl and vger lists?
> > If i unsubscribe from the osdl's KJ list and subscribe to vger's, i
> > will not miss any message i hope?
>
> Erm... I don't think so.
>
> We should subscribe to the new list and allow for a transition period
> were some people will still send messages to the old list, kindly
> telling them to stop doing so and instead post to the new list.
Fair enough. This means i need to send a message to both KJ lists?

Thanks Arnaldo.

--pradeep
>
> - Arnaldo
>


-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Alexey Dobriyan]

On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 01:56:03AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >Fair enough. This means i need to send a message to both KJ lists?
>
> I guess its OK for a few days, but please add something like:
>
> -----------
> WARNING: please subscribe to kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, by
> sending a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with "subscribe
> kernel-janitors" in the message body, kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
> will be soon terminated, hasta la vista, baby!
> -----------
>
> At the end of the message to provide for ample warning about the
> mailing list move 8-)

[clickety-click]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[pradeep singh]

On 7/6/07, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net> wrote:
[...]
> > > > Is it ok to be subscribed to KJ lists on both osdl and vger lists?
> > > > If i unsubscribe from the osdl's KJ list and subscribe to vger's, i
> > > > will not miss any message i hope?
> > >
> > > Erm... I don't think so.
> > >
[...]
>
> > Fair enough. This means i need to send a message to both KJ lists?
>
> I guess its OK for a few days, but please add something like:
Can this be set by default at the list server, please?
That would be the best way, adding by default as a footer for all mails on KJ.
May be Alexey Dobriyan should be requested.[CCing him]

Thanks
>
> -----------
> WARNING: please subscribe to kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, by
> sending a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with "subscribe
> kernel-janitors" in the message body, kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
> will be soon terminated, hasta la vista, baby!
> -----------
>
> At the end of the message to provide for ample warning about the
> mailing list move 8-)
>
> - Arnaldo
>


-- 
Pradeep
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 7/5/07, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 01:56:03AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > >Fair enough. This means i need to send a message to both KJ lists?
> >
> > I guess its OK for a few days, but please add something like:
> >
> > -----------
> > WARNING: please subscribe to kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, by
> > sending a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with "subscribe
> > kernel-janitors" in the message body, kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
> > will be soon terminated, hasta la vista, baby!
> > -----------
> >
> > At the end of the message to provide for ample warning about the
> > mailing list move 8-)
>
> [clickety-click]

Alexey, can you submit a patch to update MAINTAINERS as well?

Thanks,
Nish
_______________________________________________
REMINDER: this mailing list moved to vger.kernel.org and current one will be discontinued soon.
To resubscribe, send email to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with
&quot;subscribe kernel-janitors&quot; in message body and follow instructions.

Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] spam on kj ml

[Alexey Dobriyan]

On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 12:46:06PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> Alexey, can you submit a patch to update MAINTAINERS as well?

I wanted to, but max was faster. It's already in mainline together with
updated main webpage.

_______________________________________________
REMINDER: this mailing list moved to vger.kernel.org and current one will be discontinued soon.
To resubscribe, send email to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with
"subscribe kernel-janitors" in message body and follow instructions.

Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors