Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.212.178 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.212.178; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-wi0-f178.google.com; 
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:27:46 +0200
From: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: s7r <s7r@sky-ip.org>
Message-ID: <20150611092744.GA2167@amethyst.visucore.com>
References: <1943127.DBnVxmfOIh@1337h4x0r>
	<20150610093556.GA11409@amethyst.visucore.com>
	<557869F9.8030109@AndySchroder.com> <557883A7.7030906@sky-ip.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <557883A7.7030906@sky-ip.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: Andy Schroder <info@AndySchroder.com>,
	bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Is SourceForge still trustworthy enough
 to host this list?
Precedence: list

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 09:36:23PM +0300, s7r wrote:
> The mail list is public, so it's not like the data on it is somehow
> sensitive. Sourcefoge is fine, it has a nice web UI where you can browse
> the message and sort/order them as you want, etc.
> 
> Why would you want to move to a paid solution? And why would you want
> users to have to pay per message? This is the worst idea ever from my
> point of view. We want to encourage people to join the community, run
> full nodes, ask questions, come with solutions, ideas for improvements
> and so on. Everyone should read and write and contribute as much as
> possible with ideas in debates. You never know who can have bright ideas
> in some contexts.
> 
> Bottom line is so far sourceforge handles the mail lists just fine. I
> don't see a single advantage another mail list provider / system could
> offer, except some headache and extra work for migration. The software
> distribution via sourcefoge was cancelled for obvious reasons which I
> fully understand and agree to, but it has nothing to do with the mail
> lists. We have way more important things to brainstorm about.

I completely agree here. I'm not against migration if a much better option comes along, but e.g. paying for another provider sounds like nonsense when sourceforge does this for free (with some minor annoyances - other providers will have their own).

Paying per message is far-fetched, something that could work in economic theory with perfectly spherical people in their perfectly efficient market. In practice the likely result would be a mailing list only used for advertisement and promotion, and technical discussion and release announcements would disappear.

BTW for people that *don't* like sourceforge's web archive UI there are some other options via gmane:

http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bitcoin.devel

Wladimir