gnu-gabi group

[Mike Frysinger]

On 15 Feb 2016 16:18, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> On 15/02/16 16:03, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> On Feb 12, 2016, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>> wonderful. I am not a big fan of google groups mailinglists, they seem
> >>>> to make it hard to subscribe and don't have easy to access archives.
> >>>> Having a local gnu-gabi group on sourceware.org would be better IMHO.
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Since it's GNU tools we're talking about, we'd better use a medium that
> >> we've all already agreed to use, than one that a number of us objects
> >> to.  I, for one, have closed my Google account several Valentine's Days
> >> ago, for privacy reasons, and this makes the archives of lists hidden
> >> there unusable for me.
> > 
> > Please don't spread false information.  Anyone can subscribe Linux-ABI
> > group and its archive is to open to everyone.  You don't need a gmail account
> > for any of those.  There are quite a few non-gmail users.  You don't have
> > to take my word for it.  I can add your email to Linux-ABI group and you
> > can check it out yourself :-).
> 
> you as a group admin can do that, others cannot join
> without creating a account at google (which requires
> the acceptance of the google tos etc).

that is annoying

> you also have censorship rights over others.

umm, every mailing list has that.  Google Groups is no different.

> even if you add users to the list they cannot access
> the archive through standard http or https,

you're conflating things here.  of course access is through "standard
http or https" -- that's the transport protocol that everyone has to
implement according to the standard in order to work.  Goole is not
different here.

> they need to allow google to execute javascript code on their
> machine.

complaining that the web interface executes JS is a bit luddite-ish.

> (so wget does not work).

every message has a link to the raw message you can use to fetch the
mail directly.

perm link:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/x32-abi/IHmCJvigOEg/TyjZJYZ63DMJ

which has a link to the raw message:
https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=x32-abi/IHmCJvigOEg/TyjZJYZ63DMJ

it's actually nicer than mailmain (i.e. sourceware) as it doesn't do all
the trivial content mangling (s/@/ at/g).  it's not like e-mail scrapers
today can't reverse that easily.

> and the url through which you visit a post is not a
> reliable permanent link so linking to posts is hard.

every post has a "link" option to get a perm link.  needing the location
in the URL bar be the perm link is a weak (dumb imo) requirement.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/attachments/20160215/07e47537/attachment.sig>