[governance] IGF MAG 2018: NO NEWS

[Renata Aquino Ribeiro]

Hi

I do not oppose keeping the past archives open.

I'd also think the steps outlined seem quite reasonable.

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 6:52 AM, Tapani Tarvainen
<tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 02:59:10AM +0100, Chris Prince Udochukwu Njoku (udochukwu.njoku at unn.edu.ng) wrote:
>
>> So, let's approve the reconstruction proposal, so that Tapani et al. can
>> get to work. The sooner the better.
>
> If I get all messages in, eh, "raw" format, it won't take long to rebuild
> the archive (I'd just create a temporary mailing list on my own machine
> and use Mailman command-line tools, easy enough). If some of the messages
> are in less convenient format it may be harder and/or result may not be
> perfect (threading in particular is likely to be lost).
>
> My own archive reaches to July 2005, and Jeanette has them from
> December 2003, which must be pretty close to the very beginning.
>
> But, what should we do with the archive once reconstructed?
>
> In principle it might be possible to merge it with this (current) list
> archive, but in practice probably not (I'm not familiar with the list
> software Riseup uses, but messing with the archive probably requires
> server privileges normal list admins don't have). If someone knows
> Riseup better and can tell if there'd be an easy way to move the old
> (reconstructed) archive there, do tell.
>
> Otherwise it'd need another place. I could put it on my own server for
> now, or I could probably have it hosted by Effi (there it'd survive
> even if I'm run over by a bus) at no cost (resource requirements are
> trivial). Other suggestions would be welcome as well.
>
> If hosting it on my or Effi's server I'd want to get a new domain
> for it, too, just to keep it distinct and easily movable. That
> would cost something but little enough not to worry me. We'd have
> to agree on the domain name though.
>
> There's also an ethical question: should the archive be then made
> world-readable? The original one was not, it was restricted to
> subscribers only (which is of course why we need to reconstruct
> it now from sundry sources rather than just archive.org).
>
> Technically it would be possible to set it up so that it'd still be
> readable by subscribers only, but managing the subscriber list would
> be cumbersome (linking it to the new list would probably be impossible,
> it'd have to be maintained separately), so I'd rather avoid that.
>
> Given the nature of the list I don't think there's anything that's in
> any way sensitive at this point of time (even if some may have been at
> the time), but I would like to see something of a consensus on this
> point before proceeding.
>
> The new list archive seems to be public, btw, even if its location
> isn't entirely obvious (https://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/governance)
> and the spammer protection mechanism there probably prevents it from
> being archived by archive.org.
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>