Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large messages to 6man list]
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Sat, 19 August 2023 02:13 UTC
Return-Path: <tytso@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C72F9C151080 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 19:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mit.edu
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vqFglA--tx7R for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 19:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30B9C14CEFC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 19:12:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cwcc.thunk.org (pool-173-48-121-162.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [173.48.121.162]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 37J2CpJD027185 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 18 Aug 2023 22:12:52 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mit.edu; s=outgoing; t=1692411172; bh=oJy4CmnCuiKl4niwhHZWn39LNcmlPuPCMsrzWOYQnTc=; h=Date:From:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Xl9UtN8WgADcpWyBtGk/sch1jIj+2yrUo360Hf3il8c9osbzu2fZDUrPZ3mBPdtTq KA3K2IaQnKG7IVDf1+Pv/DND1o25x76XqDZ5eNOxGUy8taZD71daa6cfdhzzLp6CNu MEdim9CMz22LzBlV1x9nr4jeynn5PJzemfFCBzAqggqgaSFurbwR7PVjTGaoCIUDSl Jq9tSSaskRsg5FJjj1n5qXKkUq1gfLc1k3wvDWnQqbSQ5NF6DNovRYrrm8RNJ4Gmm8 693luMFUptv3QUTBOF8qno99zJVxmS2tY1II2dsdjncmQvKb8owFPCDne11Gc5/p+W bRj2qjXAW76Bg==
Received: by cwcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id E381F15C0501; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 22:12:50 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 22:12:50 -0400
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large messages to 6man list]
Message-ID: <20230819021250.GI3464136@mit.edu>
References: <RT-Ticket-20604@rt5.ietf.org> <340DA20F-95CD-4F47-B812-FBDD7DEEA472@employees.org> <CO1PR11MB4881BE776F54E60969578E5AD815A@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <1C097351-4373-4981-80E2-4F1704709934@gmail.com> <040cb77301454fa7bbac64dced787b7e@huawei.com> <rt-5.0.1-28184-1692327710-1640.20604-5-0@rt5.ietf.org> <a1cf7c741688470cadfab28b670551ef@huawei.com> <00d2eb7e-a675-8860-1a8c-6f2af927398a@gmail.com> <7e463a24-61e3-4dd3-acf0-ddf4cf801a4d@betaapp.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <7e463a24-61e3-4dd3-acf0-ddf4cf801a4d@betaapp.fastmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/8HJKm4hqhhMDN_5D-c1ZvDkn5Ws>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF-Discussion. This is the most general IETF mailing list, intended for discussion of technical, procedural, operational, and other topics for which no dedicated mailing lists exist." <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2023 02:13:00 -0000
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 07:40:52PM -0400, Martin Thomson wrote:
>
> There are many factors at play here, most of them not being
> technical in nature. Fundamentally, this is a matter of discipline
> in communications, something that tooling is not well suited to help
> with. It is a human problem.
>
> ...
>
> As a community, we could continue to hold the line in various
> ways. We could stick to silly and tiny message size limits, treat
> top posters as pariahs, and other employ equally ineffectual but
> exclusionary tactics to “encourage” compliance and homogeneity. The
> result being further marginalising contributions from new people and
> setbacks on efforts to improve diversity.
Ultimately, this is a community decision, and it very much is more of
a social rather than technical problem.
For what it's worth, the Linux kernel development community have
chosen to impose "silly" tiny message limits, and its mailing list
servers will reject e-mail with text/html or which exceed the message
size limits (originally, 40k; I believe it's 100k these days).
Furthermore, community members will gently (most of the time) correct
new community members who top-post.
Does that mean that community is dominated by old gray-beards? Not
hardly. An analysis for the number of contributors to the Linux
kernel over time show a consistent number of new, first-time
contributors every Linux kernel release:
# of developers
vers release date 1st time total # source
6.1 2022-12-11 303 2,043 [1]
6.2 2023-02-19 294 2,088 [2]
6.3 2023-04-24 250 1,971 [3]
6.4 2023-06-25 292 1,980 [4]
(6.5 hasn't released yet; give it another week or two)
[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/915435/
[2] https://lwn.net/Articles/915435/
[3] https://lwn.net/Articles/915435/
[4] https://lwn.net/Articles/915435/
For the calendar year 2022, there were a total of 5,034 unique
contributors, with 1,741 of those developers being first time
contributors. These developers were responsible for 86,660 git
commits, and a net additional 3.7 millions LOC to the Linux kernel in
2022[1]. Hardly a moribund open source project!
Hence, at least for Linux kernel developer community, using a strict
plain text e-mail standards[5][6] hasn't prevented this community from
attracting and bringing in new, productive contributors.
[5] https://docs.kernel.org/process/email-clients.html
[6] https://useplaintext.email/
Now, the Linux kernel community is not the same as the IETF community,
and what works for Linux kernel may not work for the IETF. But I
don't think it is self evident that a community is doomed become
irrelevance, with new contributors fleeing in horror, if chooses to
standardize on plain text e-mail. Ultimately, this is a choice for
the IETF community as a whole to make.
- Ted
- The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large messages to… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John Levine
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Rob Sayre
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Kyle Rose
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… George Michaelson
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John R Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Martin Thomson
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Rob Sayre
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Warren Kumari
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… John C Klensin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… tom petch
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John R Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Christian Huitema
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John R Levine
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Richard Barnes
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… John C Klensin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… John C Klensin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… John Levine
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… George Michaelson
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Masataka Ohta
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- RE: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… tom petch
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Masataka Ohta
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] The IETF's email mess [was: R… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… John Levine
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Nathaniel Borenstein
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… John Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John R Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Christian Huitema
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… George Michaelson
- Re: [Tools-discuss] formatting follies, was The I… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John R Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Lloyd W
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John R Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] drafting tools, was messaging… John R. Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] drafting tools, was messaging… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] drafting tools, was messaging… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Stephen Farrell
- RE: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… S Moonesamy
- RE: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Vasilenko Eduard
- RE: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… S Moonesamy
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… tom petch
- RE: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Vasilenko Eduard
- RE: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John Levine
- RE: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… S Moonesamy
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Andrew Newton
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… tom petch
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… Andrew Newton
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John Scudder
- Re: The IETF's email mess [was: RE: Large message… John Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John R. Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John R. Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… S Moonesamy
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Hector Santos
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Rob Sayre
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Mesh Interactive Mail Re: [Tools-discuss] messagi… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Mesh Interactive Mail Re: [Tools-discuss] mes… Keith Moore
- Re: Mesh Interactive Mail Re: [Tools-discuss] mes… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] interactive messaging follies… John Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] interactive messaging follies… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John Levine
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… John C Klensin
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Rob Sayre
- Re: [Tools-discuss] messaging formatting follies,… Keith Moore