Re: Any chance to move your MLs to Google Groups?

[Bryen M Yunashko <a11yrocks bryen com>]

On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 14:51 +0300, alex diavatis wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> 
> I guess what I am asking will never make it. Think it as just another
> opinion :)
> Moving from MLs to Google Groups will get nothing but advantages.
> 
> 
> Sharing and Discovering
> Open Source is about sharing. Sharing isn't working good in hardly
> discovered MLs.
> I am also saying this because of the close source Google platform. Is
> better to use a close platform and be more "open source" rather to
> use an open platform and be less "open source".
>  
> Besides you also maintain some repos in Github, and I wish you will
> move there.
> 
> 
> Searching and Discovering
> There are many how-tos and tips on your mailing lists about coding.
> Searching in Google doesn't show them.
> 
> 
> Easy of Use  
> Nothing to say here, you all have used Google Groups(GG) :)
> One thing only is the good searching inside the GG and how easily you
> can follow, respond,  star a subject etc etc
> 
> 
> Popularity / Get more people to Gnome
> You'll get definitely more responses, more people will involve
> 
> 
> Gnome Image
> You'll get a more modern face.
> 
> 
> Maintaining
> Easier for you
> 
> 
> Gnome and Google
> People use Google. Gnome use Google a lot. GOA, Documents (Google
> Drive support now?), Calendar etc.. 
> Tie your platform more with Google. I am not in favor of Google but
> I'm in favor of the best option at the moment
> 
> 
> MLs aside with GG
> I am not asking you to remove the MLs. You can handle them as Gnome
> Live. With closed registration but with open view.
> Or another way.. 
> 
> 
> Anyway, I might say stupid things!
> 
> 
> Thank you
> - alex

Use of @google signifies amateurity and threatens branding efforts by
marketing teams within organizations.

I find it completely unprofessional when a formal organization sends me
an email that is <mail>@google.com or @gmail.com instead of
@orgname.org.  It sends a very strong message to readers that the
organization isn't even solified enough to have its own infrastructure.

And this affects branding as well.  "gnome.org" is a very important part
of the branding.

Moreover, while it is good to have many people join a mailing list, it
would be extremely chaotic if we made it "that much easier" to join
mailing lists.  We would immediately become overcrowded, bikeshedding
would be a daily occurance, and distraction would be the order of the
day.   

Google Groups requires attentive administration.  I can automatically
join any current mailing list on GNOME (or in any other formal open
source organization) and immediately participate.  Far too frequently
when I join a Google Group, I have to wait days, if not weeks until
someone realizes to accept my request to join.  It is a ridiculous waste
of our resources to have someone sitting around to pay attention to that
level of administration.

Google Groups has its place, and yes Google Groups offers benefits in
that you can easily search for mailing lists that fit your interests.
But that isn't what and how mailing lists work for in many open source
organizations.   That's what forums and the like are for.

It is not harmonious to put ourselves in the hands of Google or any
other organization and cede control of our own infrastructure.

Bryen M Yunashko