[Osmf-talk] Communications and osmf-talk (Was: Reaching out and diversity (Was: Re: AGM and board elections))
luigi.toscano at tiscali.it
Thu Oct 2 17:10:24 UTC 2014
On Thursday 02 of October 2014 18:52:23 Kathleen Danielson wrote:
> If you reread my message you'll see that I did not suggest doing away with
> an email service for OSM.
> I did not make any complaints about our membership fee. I merely agreed
> with Simon that a semi-private list may not be an ideal solution. It
> creates barriers to conversation, and as Simon pointed out it encourages
> multi - channel discussions, which seems to be troubling to some
> participants in this discussion.
About this topic (association list used for community discussion), we had a
similar situation in KDE e.V. (from the website: https://ev.kde.org/, " KDE
e.V. is a registered non-profit organization that represents the KDE Community
in legal and financial matters. Read our mission statement. ").
Even if the membership is for free (invite-based) and it collects most of non-
one-patch-and-run contributors, we had many community discussions going on on
the internal list of KDE e.V., which made sense in some cases because of the
topic involved (not yet ready for public, etc), but definitely not for most of
So we created an open list (kde-community@) for community discussions, and
moved all topics where there is no requirement of being "careful" (see legal
issues, internal things that needs to be decided, etc), which means the big
majority of discussions.
Following the discussions, it seems that there is no public osm-community-like
list (I guess most lists are the "technical" ones like it was in KDE).
More information about the osmf-talk