From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Z44uF-0004Bj-GS for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Jun 2015 10:12:47 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.192.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.192.173; envelope-from=wtogami@gmail.com; helo=mail-pd0-f173.google.com; Received: from mail-pd0-f173.google.com ([209.85.192.173]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z44uD-00018s-PD for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Jun 2015 10:12:47 +0000 Received: by pdbki1 with SMTP id ki1so52189542pdb.1 for ; Sun, 14 Jun 2015 03:12:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.229.65 with SMTP id so1mr38329636pac.92.1434276760103; Sun, 14 Jun 2015 03:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.93.72 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Jun 2015 03:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 00:12:40 -1000 Message-ID: From: "Warren Togami Jr." To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b15ae73cbb1cb0518779475 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (wtogami[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Z44uD-00018s-PD Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: Move Bitcoin Dev List to a Neutral Competent Entity X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 10:12:47 -0000 --047d7b15ae73cbb1cb0518779475 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Discomfort with Sourceforge For a while now people have been expressing concern about Sourceforge's continued hosting of the bitcoin-dev mailing list. Downloads were moved completely to bitcoin.org after the Sept 2014 hacking incident of the SF project account. The company's behavior and perceived stability have been growing to be increasingly questionable. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/gimp_dumps_sourceforge_over_dodgy_a= ds_and_installer November 2013: GIMP flees SourceForge over dodgy ads and installer https://lwn.net/Articles/646118/ May 28th, 2015: SourceForge replacing GIMP Windows downloads http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/2015/q2/194 June 3rd, 2015: Sourceforge hijacked nmap's old site and downloads. When this topic came up over the past two years, it seemed that most people agreed it would be a good idea to move. Someone always suggests Google Groups as the replacement host. Google is quickly shot down as too controversial in this community, and it becomes an even more difficult question as to who else should host it. Realizing this is not so simple, discussion then dies off until the next time somebody brings it up. http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/bitcoin-development/thread/1943127= .DBnVxmfOIh%401337h4x0r/#msg34192607 Somebody brought it up again this past week. It seems logical that an open discussion list is not a big deal to continue to be hosted on Sourceforge, as there isn=E2=80=99t much they could do to s= crew it up. I personally think moving it away now would be seen as a gesture that we do not consider their behavior to be acceptable. There are also some benefits in being hosted elsewhere, at an entity able to professionally maintain their infrastructure while also being neutral to the content. Proposal: Move Bitcoin Dev List to a Neutral Competent Entity Bitcoin is a global infrastructure development project where it would be politically awkward for any of the existing Bitcoin companies or orgs to host due to questions it would raise about perceived political control. For example, consider a bizarro parallel universe where MtGox was the inventor of Bitcoin, where they hosted its development infrastructure and dev list under their own name. Even if what they published was 100% technically and ideologically equivalent to the Bitcoin we know in our dimension, most people wouldn't have trusted it merely due to appearances and it would have easily gone nowhere. I had a similar thought process last week when sidechains code was approaching release. Sidechains, like Bitcoin itself, are intended to be a generic piece of infrastructure (like ethernet?) that anyone can build upon and use. We thought about Google Groups or existing orgs that already host various open source infrastructure discussion lists like the IETF or the Linux Foundation. Google is too controversial in this community, and the IETF is seen as possibly too politically fractured. The Linux Foundation hosts a bunch of infrastructure lists and it seems that nobody in the Open Source industry considers them to be particularly objectionable. I talked with LF about the idea of hosting generic Bitcoin-related infrastructure development lists. They agreed as OSS infrastructure dev is already within their charter, so early this week sidechains-dev list began hosting there. >From the perspective of our community, for bitcoin-dev it seems like a great fit. Why? While they are interested in supporting general open source development, the LF has literally zero stake in this. In addition to neutrality, they seem to be suitable as a competent host. They have full-time sysadmins maintaining their infrastructure including the Mailman server. They are soon upgrading to Mailman 3 , which means mailing lists would benefit from the improved archive browser. I am not personally familiar with HyperKitty, but the point here is they are a stable non-profit entity who will competently maintain and improve things like their Mailman deployment (a huge improvement over the stagnant Sourceforge). It seems that LF would be competent, neutral place to host dev lists for the long-term. To be clear, this proposal is only about hosting the discussion list. The LF would have no control over the Bitcoin Project, as no single entity should. Proposed Action Plan - Discuss this openly within this community. Above is one example of a great neutral and competent host. If the technical leaders here can agr= ee to move to a particular neutral host then we do it. - Migration: The current list admins become the new list admins. We import the entire list archive into the new host's archives for user convenience. - http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/ Kill bitcoin-list and bitcoin-test. Very few people actually use it. Actually, let's delete = the entire Bitcoin Sourceforge project as its continued existence serves no purpose and it only confuses people who find it. By deletion, nobody ha= s to monitor it for a repeat of the Sept 2014 hacking incident or GIM= P-type hijacking ? - The toughest question would be the appropriateness of auto-importing the subscriber list to another list server, as mass imports have a tendency = to upset people. Thoughts? Warren Togami --047d7b15ae73cbb1cb0518779475 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Discomfort with Sourceforge

For a while now people have been = expressing concern about Sourceforge's continued hosting of the bitcoin= -dev mailing list.=C2=A0 Downloads were moved completely to bitcoin.org after the Sept 2014 hacking incident of the= SF project account.=C2=A0 The company's behavior and perceived stabili= ty have been growing to be increasingly questionable.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/gimp_dumps_sourceforge_ov= er_dodgy_ads_and_installer

November 2013: GIMP flees SourceForge over dodg= y ads and installer

https://lwn.n= et/Articles/646118/

May 28th, 2015: SourceForge replacing GIMP Windows dow= nloads

http://seclists.or= g/nmap-dev/2015/q2/194

June 3rd, 2015: Sourceforge hijacked nmap's old= site and downloads.


When this topic came up over the past two years, it s= eemed that most people agreed it would be a good idea to move.=C2=A0 Someon= e always suggests Google Groups as the replacement host.=C2=A0 Google is qu= ickly shot down as too controversial in this community, and it becomes an e= ven more difficult question as to who else should host it.=C2=A0 Realizing = this is not so simple, discussion then dies off until the next time somebod= y brings it up.


http://so= urceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/bitcoin-development/thread/1943127.DBnVxmfO= Ih%401337h4x0r/#msg34192607

Somebody brought it up again this past week.


= It seems logical that an open discussion list is not a big deal to continue= to be hosted on Sourceforge, as there isn=E2=80=99t much they could do to = screw it up.=C2=A0 I personally think moving it away now would be seen as a= gesture that we do not consider their behavior to be acceptable.=C2=A0 The= re are also some benefits in being hosted elsewhere, at an entity able to p= rofessionally maintain their infrastructure while also being neutral to the= content.


Proposal: Move Bitcoin Dev List to a Neutral Co= mpetent Entity


Bitcoin is a global infrastructure development project wher= e it would be politically awkward for any of the existing Bitcoin companies= or orgs to host due to questions it would raise about perceived political = control.=C2=A0 For example, consider a bizarro parallel universe where MtGo= x was the inventor of Bitcoin, where they hosted its development infrastruc= ture and dev list under their own name.=C2=A0 Even if what they published w= as 100% technically and ideologically equivalent to the Bitcoin we know in = our dimension, most people wouldn't have trusted it merely due to appea= rances and it would have easily gone nowhere.


I had a similar thought proc= ess last week when sidechains code was approaching release. Sidechains, lik= e Bitcoin itself, are intended to be a generic piece of infrastructure (lik= e ethernet?) that anyone can build upon and use.=C2=A0 We thought about Goo= gle Groups or existing orgs that already host various open source infrastru= cture discussion lists like the IETF or the Linux Foundation.=C2=A0 Google = is too controversial in this community, and the IETF is seen as possibly to= o politically fractured.=C2=A0 The Linux Foundation hosts a bunch of infrastructure lists and it seems that nobo= dy in the Open Source industry considers them to be particularly objectiona= ble.=C2=A0 I talked with LF about the idea of hosting generic Bitcoin-relat= ed infrastructure development lists.=C2=A0 They agreed as OSS infrastructur= e dev is already within their charter, so early this week sidechains-dev li= st began hosting there.


From the perspective of our community, for bitcoin= -dev it seems like a great fit.=C2=A0 Why?=C2=A0 While they are interested = in supporting general open source development, the LF has literally zero st= ake in this.=C2=A0 In addition to neutrality, they seem to be suitable as a= competent host.=C2=A0 They have full-time sysadmins maintaining their= infrastructure including the Mailman server. They are soon upgrading to Mailman 3, which means mailing lists would benefit from the i= mproved archive browser.=C2=A0 I am not personally familiar with HyperKitty= , but the point here is they are a stable non-profit entity who will compet= ently maintain and improve things like their Mailman deployment (a huge imp= rovement over the stagnant Sourceforge).=C2=A0 It seems that LF would be co= mpetent, neutral place to host dev lists for the long-term.


<= p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><= span style=3D"font-size:14.6666666666667px;font-family:Arial;vertical-align= :baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;background-color:transparent">To be clear, t= his proposal is only about hosting the discussion list.=C2=A0 The LF would = have no control over the Bitcoin Project, as no single entity should.


Proposed Action Plan


  • Discuss this o= penly within this community.=C2=A0 Above is one example of a great neutral = and competent host.=C2=A0 If the technical leaders here can agree to move t= o a particular neutral host then we do it.

  • Migration: The current list admins become the new l= ist admins.=C2=A0 We import the entire list archive into the new host's= archives for user convenience.

  • http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/ = =C2=A0Kill bitcoin-list and bitcoin-test.=C2=A0 Very few people actually us= e it.=C2=A0 Actually, let's delete the entire Bitcoin Sourceforge proje= ct as its continued existence serves no purpose and it only confuses people= who find it.=C2=A0 By deletion, nobody has to monitor it for a repeat of t= he Sept 2014 hacking incident<= /a> or G= IMP-type hijacking?

  • The toughest question would be the appropriateness of auto-importing the s= ubscriber list to another list server, as mass imports have a tendency to u= pset people.


Thoughts?


Warren Togami
--047d7b15ae73cbb1cb0518779475--