Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announcement list

[Marc Petit-Huguenin <[e-mail]>]

Maybe in the form of a weekly newsletter (email and RSS with full content), i.e. not just concatenation of messages and links, but classified by topics with a one sentence summary.

On 9/29/21 6:13 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Hi Al,
> 
> I would go further, and consolidate all interim announcements into one per week on announce, and remind people to subscribe to the IETF calendar (WGs could still see the non-consolidated). Similarly consolidate document actions to one per week.  Similarly with RFCs. That reduces the #s considerably.
> 
> Eliot
> 
> On 29.09.21 14:57, MORTON JR., AL wrote:
>> Hi Lars,
>>
>> following-up on "reduce the data to usable information":
>>
>> It occurred to me that when I see several separate (#10) Interim Meeting announcement e-mails for the *same* WG, that a consolidated announcement for all the meetings would suffice. (One press of the delete key for those who are uninterested.)
>>
>> Then, any announcement that is purely an announcement (no e-mail discussion thread follows) could be combined with others (#4,6,7,8) when they are prepared/ready close in time.
>>
>> We retain the same info on ietf-announce with fewer messages.
>>
>> Al
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: WGChairs <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Lars Eggert
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 8:12 AM
>>> To: Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>
>>> Cc: Working Chairs <[e-mail]>; Christian Huitema
>>> <[e-mail]>; IETF <[e-mail]>
>>> Subject: Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announcement list
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2021-9-27, at 18:36, Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> In an admirable effort to be transparent, we have inundated this list in
>>> particular with data.  We now need to take the time to reduce that data  to
>>> usable information.  Please take another swing.
>>>
>>> the IESG certainly could. But I'm also pretty convinced that whatever proposal
>>> we came up with would get improved by the community pretty immediately.
>>>
>>> So maybe we could try the opposite, and see if the community has some
>>> consensus on what information they would like to retain on ietf-announce,
>>> under the assumption that that would then remain our lists for broad
>>> announcements.
>>>
>>> For reference, here's again the list of posting classes that currently go
>>> there, and the count of messages in each class in the last year:
>>>
>>> 1.  Announcements sent manually by <various roles> = 284
>>> 2.  Announcements of new and updated WG charters & WG closures = 44
>>> 3.  (included in above 44)
>>> 4.  Announcements of new non-WG mailing lists =    13
>>> 5.  Announcements of new RFCs =    275
>>> 6.  IESG and LLC telechat announcements = 39
>>> 7.  Announcements of document actions = 175
>>> 8.  Announcements of IESG conflict-review results = 14
>>> 9.  Last call announcements for I-Ds = 174 (+ 4 for other actions)
>>> 10. Interim WG meeting announcements = 256
>>>
>>> The "important-news" proposal would only retain those under (1) above. (We
>>> could have a conversation if some of those could also be moved elsewhere, but
>>> that's maybe a separate discussion.)
>>>
>>> For any type of posting we'd remove, we could of course create a new list, so
>>> that the information was still shared. I understand that when we move to
>>> mailman3, we'll get a much better web-based subscription interface that will
>>> make managing subscriptions much more straightforward.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lars
>>
> 


-- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: [e-mail]
Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug