Re: sr.ht --- "sir hat" --- alternatives to Github

[Lars Eggert <[e-mail]>]

On 2019-1-24, at 18:30, Nico Williams <[e-mail]> wrote:
> But GH does NOT send you email copies of your comments and actions.

The [e-mail] setup we use does get email for everyone's actions.

How we did this is described in https://larseggert.github.io/github-bcp/#rfc.section.2.2, which was at some point slated to become an appendix in one of the other active drafts, but I think that never happened.

Here is the relevant part:

> In order to allow WG participants to follow the activity on GitHub without needing to check the GitHub web site, we have set up a separate “quic-issues” mailing list at the IETF. It was a deliberate decision to use a list other than the regular WG mailing list. First, because we are intensively using GitHub, a lot of notifications get generated (dozens per day), which would drown out other list traffic, Second, the issues list is configured as a read-only list, where all incoming email is rejected, except for some whitelisted senders. The intent is to keep all discussion on the regular WG mailing list, or on GitHub tickets. (While GitHub will correctly reflect email replies to issue notifications, they seem to loose sender information, which is useless.)
> Getting GitHub notifications to go to this list was mildly painful, and involved creating a dummy “IETF QUIC WG” GitHub user account, whose subscription email address is the quic-issues list address. The dummy user was made a member of the QUIC GitHub organization, and will therefore by default “track” all repo activity. This will cause GitHub to create the desired stream of notification emails to an IETF list. One caveat here is that GitHub uses the email address associated with the user who is interacting with the web site as the sender address of notification emails, which requires regular whitelisting in mailman. It also means that these users are allowed to otherwise email the issues list; we trust they don’t. This email integration is rather dissatisfyingly complex; we’d be interested to learn of a better way.
> 

Lars