From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4F77CA1 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2016 18:29:58 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 421FC304032 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2016 16:29:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com (aserp1040.oracle.com [141.146.126.69]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id bPTsWgnTa4HdBWCy (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 16:29:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 16:29:43 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: Spam on this list Message-ID: <20160803232943.GI8593@birch.djwong.org> References: <4278AB9734C1445A8E48635B155149F8@dinulap> <57CF7681619F42CCB4C0CF589E9686E5@dinulap> <4382687.Pe7d1tBhVA@merkaba> <9b25f9f9-8a55-8744-9f18-c1045fae0f79@telefonica.net> <20160803231529.GX16044@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160803231529.GX16044@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: "Carlos E. R." , XFS mail list On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 09:15:29AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 03:34:58PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > > On 2016-08-03 15:21, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > > > Lista, Carlos, I recommend: If you are concerned about spam on the list > > > contact the listmasters of it. They are the ones that can address it globally > > > for the list. > > > > Oh, I did, long ago. Still waiting. > > Yes, that is the fundamental issue - spam filtering is essentially > controlled by SGI's internal infrastructure, which we have little > option on. > > What it comes down to is whether we continue to use this list > (xfs@oss.sgi.com) or whether we move to linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org > so we get much more robust and up-to-date spam filtering. The issue > with doing this is forcing everyone to resubscribe, and then > capturing everything that is still sent to xfs@oss.sgi.com. > > That said, I'm seriously tempted right now just to say "we're moving > to vger" and asking everyone to resubscribe to that list, and then > making xfs@oss.sgi.com respond with "list moved to vger, please > repost there". i.e. not even put a forwarding gateway in place. > > If we do that, then I'll also shut down all the XFS git trees on > oss.sgi.com - I'll add commits to the them to say "go to > kernel.org". I'll need to work something out for the tarball > releases, but kernel.org does have functionality for that, too, so > that may just be a small change of process on my end (i.e. use kup). > Once that is done, we'll be running completely on community provided > infrastructure.... > > Thoughts? YAY! By the way, could we update the docs on http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_Papers_and_Documentation ? The filesystem structure guide is a little out of date. (The user guide probably is too, but as I've only been sending patches for the disk format guide I'm keeping my mouth shut about the others.) --D > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs