Issue #5 - Please explain the topic of each mailing list

Filipus Klutiero chealer at
Sat Oct 8 16:38:57 UTC 2016

Hi Martin,

On 2016-10-04 14:33, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Filipus Klutiero <chealer at> [2016-10-01 12:49]:
>> lists 5 mailing lists
>> of SPI. Except for the first 2, there is no description of what
>> content each has or should receive. The descriptions of spi-private,
>> spi-projects and spi-board only describe their membership.
> spi-projects is a list to which all the project liaisons of SPI
> associated projects are subscribed.  It's used by the board to contact
> all project liaisons at the same time, e.g. to ask which projects
> participate in Google Summer of Code and want SPI to handle their
> payments or to get input from SPI projects on the SPI annual report.

Thank you
> spi-board is a list of the board of directors to communicate.  It's
> also used as a contact address for the board.

OK, but in terms of content, what discussions would be more appropriate to direct to spi-board than to, I guess, spi-general?

> Since the general public cannot subscribe to these lists, I don't
> think it makes sense to list them at
> It's just confusing.
> I think I'll add the links to the onboarding info for directors and
> liaisons instead (<>).

As you want, I have no strong opinion on that.

>> spi-private is the only one I am member of. Board elections is one
>> topic sometimes treated on that list, but a private list should not
>> be designated as the proper forum for electoral discussions.
> Personally, I feel that spi-private has been overused and most of the
> conversation should have been on spi-general.  spi-private should only
> be used for things that should not be public / publicly archived.

I agree with you. From the approximately 100 mails sent to spi-private which I have read, I do not remember a single one which could not have been sent to spi-general (instead).

> Do you have a suggestion on how to improve the page to make this
> clearer?

Can we find examples of topics which would be more appropriate to discuss on spi-private than on spi-general (or other currently existing lists)? Since we are not directly producing software, I do not see the interest of privacy for security, except insofar as we make use of potentially vulnerable software products.

Filipus Klutiero

More information about the Spi-general mailing list