[racket] users Digest, Vol 114, Issue 64

Thank you for the notice and warning regarding the move to Google Groups.

Will a Google group work well for people with just an email address and not Google accounts nor gmail accounts?  Or those unwilling to use them?

Will digests be available?

Regards,
Paul


>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 08:37:04 -0800
>From: John Clements <johnbclements at gmail.com>
>To: "users at racket-lang.org" <users at racket-lang.org>
>Subject: [racket] Racket Users moving to Google Groups
>Message-ID:
>	<CAAwfr=VG81Pvf327j22d4E8DSb8P1Po14=c5NJ=XNH=va5-Jdg at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>Dear all,
>
>PLT would like to get out of the mailing-list administration game.
>We?re
>therefore proposing to move the Racket Users mailing list to Google
>Groups.
>
>In fact, we?ve already begun the process of moving our mailing lists;
>the
>developers mailing list, racket-dev, has already moved to Google
>Groups,
>without major incident[*].
>
>In particular, it?s still possible to send mail to the developers
>mailing
>list using the address dev at racket-lang.org, and we?re planning to
>continue
>to use the users at racket-lang.org e-mail address for the new users
>group.
>
>I?m proposing that we make this move for the Users mailing list some
>time
>in mid-to-late March.
>
>Google has a cap on the number of e-mail addresses that can be invited
>to a
>mailing list, and an even tighter cap on the number of e-mail addresses
>that can be directly added. For this reason, we?re going to ask you to
>sign
>*yourself* up for the new group, when we move. After a brief interval,
>we?ll begin inviting all of the e-mail addresses that don?t yet appear
>on
>the new mailing list. There are currently 1532 members on the users
>list,
>though, so this is going to take a while.
>
>One potential hiccup: there is an existing Users google group, and
>we?re
>hoping to re-purpose this as the main group rather than as an archive.
>This
>list has a google setting?"list is an archive?, if I recall
>correctly?that
>is now deprecated. It seems possible that making changes to the way
>this
>list is configured could have unexpected consequences, and makes it
>impossible to test various transition scenarios.
>
>The local mailman archive of the existing list will continue to exist,
>though new messages will not be added to it. The remote archives at
>gmane
>and mail-archive and marc should be able to handle the transition, and
>hopefully will not drop too many messages during the transition.
>
>Let us know how this sounds to you!
>
>John Clements
>
>
>[*] We?re still waiting to hear from gmane and marc.info about archive
>updates; mail-archive has successfully made the jump already.