[petsc-users] Mailing list reply-to munging (was Any changes in ML usage between 3.1-p8 -> 3.3-p6?)

[Jed Brown]

Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:

> Sure - there is cost for 'minority users. But to save that - you
> propose a cost to majority users [i.e everyone should conciously use
> 'reply-all']

That has always been standard mailing list etiquette.

>> Does the list configuration have an API?  If so, we could have a bot
>> monitoring petsc-users email and subscribing (without delivery)
>> addresses that are Cc'd in approved messages?
>
> you can check that.

Hmm, I couldn't find it.

> Not sure if its possible to scrub just the attachments. If thats
> possible you can now configure mailman to do that.

It looks like we can do it, but not from the web interface:

http://wiki.list.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7602227

One option would be to apply a good compression like lzma/xz to
configure.log attachments.  That brings a 5MB log file down to 160 kB.
PETSc could compress configure.log up-front, but then you have to use
xzless to look at it and not many people know to do that.

>> > I don't know if there is an option for that. Currently all moderators
>> > get such emails.
>> 
>> There is a difference between list "moderator" and "admin", right?  Can
>> the current petsc-maint group be labeled as "moderator" so that we get
>> the attachments?
>
> Sure - you can set that up now.

Okay, I set up two topics:

* installation
* methods

The former currently matches 'configure.log|make.log' and the latter
matches the following which should be almost all generally "interesting"
threads.

method
|converge
|diverge
|solver
|solving
|performance
|usage
|poisson
|stokes
|elasticity
|compressible
|flow
|preconditioner
|krylov
|domain

Let's see how well this classifies.  If it is accurate, we can mention
that people are welcome to unsubscribe from [installation], and possibly
change the defaults.