Discussion Forums/Request For Comment: Difference between revisions

m
No edit summary
 
(21 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
== Status Quo ==
== Status Quo ==


At present, Mozilla IT manages two Mailman v2 instances, <b>one</b> for 'simple' Mailing Lists (various -AT-mozilla.org addresses) and <b>the other</b> for a Newsgroups + Mailing Lists (a.k.a. "Discussion Forums") which have @lists.mozilla.org email addresses which are also synced  with corresponding Newsgroups hosted at nntp://news.mozilla.org/ provided by GigaNews and synced to Google Groups.
At present, Mozilla IT manages two Mailman (v2) instances, [https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/ the first] is for 'simple' Mailing Lists (various '''@mozilla.org''' addresses) and [https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo the second] for a "Discussion Forum" a Mailing Lists that is transparently synced with a Newsgroups and consequentially Google Groups, and have '''@lists.mozilla.org''' email address. Currently, [http://giganews.com/ GigaNews] hosts [nntp://news.mozilla.org/ nntp://news.mozilla.org/], which is the Newsgroup half of the ''Mailing List + Newsgroup'' combination.


Discussion Forums are the [[https://wiki.mozilla.org/Discussion_Forums/Problem_Statement primary form of communication]] for projects within Mozilla, and are available over the most kinds of mediums: email, newsgroup or via Google Groups' web interface; all posts are synced (hopefully) across all other mediums, and the user not bothered with the details. To encourage the largest range of voices, we want to be available in a seamless way to as many formats and devices as possible.
Discussion Forums are the [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Discussion_Forums/Problem_Statement primary form of communication] for projects within Mozilla, and are meant to be made available over the widest array of communication protocols: email, newsgroup and the Web via the Google Groups' website. All posts are synced (hopefully) across all other mediums transparently, making for a maximally inclusive set of users. To encourage the largest range of voices, Mozilla wants our discussions to take place in as many useful formats and devices as possible.


== Problems ==
== Problems ==
Line 14: Line 14:


SPAM has been a consistent problem in the past and is tricky problem to solve outright. IT is deploying a well-trained Spam Assassin to catching incoming junk mail. SPAM that originates from Google Groups or from GigaNews' side (news.mozilla.org) is outside our direct control at the moment.
SPAM has been a consistent problem in the past and is tricky problem to solve outright. IT is deploying a well-trained Spam Assassin to catching incoming junk mail. SPAM that originates from Google Groups or from GigaNews' side (news.mozilla.org) is outside our direct control at the moment.
* [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Discussion_Forums/Proposal A proposal to address SPAM from Google Groups]


=== Google Groups Syncing ===
=== Google Groups Syncing ===


Currently, we rely on Google Groups to provide an interactive web-accessible archive for Discussion Forum posts. We do this by modifying the Mailman listinfo template. In contrast, standard Mailing Lists still provide a static archive of the mailing list posts to it.
Discussion Forums are synchronized from email to NNTP newsgroups (the Usenet), hosted at [news://news.mozilla.org/ nntp://news.mozilla.org/]. These newsgroup messages are synced by Google Groups and in turn provide a web interface to post responses that then show up correctly as expected on the email list. For various reasons, Google Groups has [http://blog.gerv.net/2012/07/google-groups-fail/ had trouble reliably syncing posts] from our mozilla.* newsgroups([https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=716007 bug 716007], in particularly new Forums that get created from time to time. This inconsistency causes confusion and fragmentation of the conversation, and ultimately frustration.
 
For various reasons, Google Groups has had trouble [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=716007 reliably syncing posts] from outside of its own interface, including blocking email posts from showing up correctly on the Google Groups newsgroup page. This inconsistency caused confusion and fragmentation of the project's attempts at conversation.


=== Newsgroup gateways break threading ===
=== Newsgroup gateways break threading ===


The 2.x mailman we are using clobbers message-id's when gatewaying messages from mailing lists to newsgroups.  Because of the naive way in which this is done, this breaks hierarchical threading in mail clients like Thunderbird.  See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=651527 for more.
The 2.x mailman we are using clobbers message-id's when gatewaying messages from mailing lists to newsgroups.  Because of the naive way in which this is done, this breaks hierarchical threading in mail clients like Thunderbird.  See [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=651527 Bug 651527] for more.


This may not be obvious to people using the gmail web client because it only orders messages chronologically and it uses a mixture of content analysis to establish conversation groupings.
This may not be obvious to people using the gmail web client because it only orders messages chronologically and it uses a mixture of content analysis to establish conversation groupings.
Line 34: Line 34:


(added by asuth)
(added by asuth)
=== Unreliable Web archive creation (Google Groups) ===
Google has had trouble creating new groups for new Mozilla lists. We have also had trouble getting the groups created in a timely manner. There are still several Mozilla lists without Web visible archives. (See {{bug|716007}}) We need a more reliable Web archive solution.
=== Unreliable archive - some messages aren't archived (Google Groups) ===
As Myk describes [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=716007#c40 here], some messages to a mailing list may not make it to the corresponding Google Group. We need a reliable archive of our discussions.
=== Long Term Future of Google Groups? ===
It's unclear (to me) what Google's long-term commitment will be to the Google Groups archives. When first launched it provided a significant advancement (for the time) in making Usenet more broadly accessible, and they made a big push to make it a rich archive (eg Dejanews acquisition, incorporation of backup tapes from the early days of Usenet).
Since then the UI has become stale (though not long ago it got a much-needed refresh), it has a spotty quality record (see other sections in this document, and I've seen issues in non-Mozilla groups too), and the usage of Usenet as a discussion medium has continued to drop.
As we a consider a replacement, if we use a 3rd party service we should consider if and how we are able to extract/mirror content so it can be migrated in the future.
=== Stuck in a Web 0.1 World ===
I know, I know. Those kids using HTML in your email need to get off your lawn.
But every participatory environment on the web these days allows some form of rich content. Images, link previews, content formatting, etc. As one example, look at how useful [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12748246/sorting-1-million-8-digit-numbers-in-1mb-of-ram/ StackOverflow answers] can be when answers have visual explanations and nicely formatted code.
The inability to include images makes the current forum options useless for most UI/UX discussions (which is part of why you'll not find much usage from Firefox FE/UI/UX people there).


=== <<insert your own>> ===
=== <<insert your own>> ===
 
== Desired Features ==
== Desired Features ==


Line 49: Line 71:


A tablet or mobile-friendly interface, as a growing number of users will be using Firefox for Android, etc.
A tablet or mobile-friendly interface, as a growing number of users will be using Firefox for Android, etc.
[dolske] I would qualify this a bit: A first version should be readable on a mobile device. Given the large overall scope of this project, and the tendency of mobile device usage to be more in the realm of consumption than generation, a polished interface for contributing via mobile would be entirely fair to defer to a followup version. Especially considering that email/google isn't a great experience on mobile today.


=== Improved Moderation tools ===
=== Improved Moderation tools ===


Being able to crowd-source the task of moderation would be a great way to encourage participation and ease the burden of current List Admins.
Being able to crowd-source the task of moderation would be a great way to encourage participation and ease the burden of current List Admins.
There must also be explicit moderation tools for list moderators. The inability to block abusive users, redirect disruptive threads, halt flamewars, etc is a major reason why many avoid the existing discussion forums.


=== Make it easier to spin up new mailing lists ===
=== Make it easier to spin up new mailing lists ===
Line 83: Line 109:
* Improved web API, allows for automation of common tasks (subscribe, create)
* Improved web API, allows for automation of common tasks (subscribe, create)
* http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/Mailman+3.0
* http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/Mailman+3.0
=== Jive Social Intranet ===
* Activity Stream
* Microblogs
* http://www.jivesoftware.com/social-business/solutions/social-intranet/features


=== Nabble ===
=== Nabble ===
Line 99: Line 119:
* http://gmane.org
* http://gmane.org


=== <<insert your own>> ===
=== Buddycloud ===
* http://buddycloud.com/
* WebFWD Partner
 
== Miscellaneous ==


=== Mozillian Diaspora ===
=== Diaspora ===


Open Source 'Social Newsfeed' software exists. Should Mozilla pursue hosting Social Network tools for Mozillians (community members and volunteers, plus Mozilla employees)?
Open Source 'Social Newsfeed' software exists. Should Mozilla pursue hosting Social Network tools for Mozillians (community members and volunteers, plus Mozilla employees)?
Line 111: Line 129:
* http://diasporaproject.org/
* http://diasporaproject.org/


=== Mozillian Jabber ===
=== SaaS Hosted Solutions ===
 
* Jive Social Intranet
** Activity Stream
** Microblogs
** http://www.jivesoftware.com/social-business/solutions/social-intranet/features
 
* Zyncro
** http://www.zyncro.com/en/overview/features
 
* ThoughtFarmer
** http://www.thoughtfarmer.com/
 
* Socialtext
** http://www.socialtext.com/
 
* Qontext
** http://www.qontext.com/


Modern Jabber (XMMP) is a flexible instant messaging system. Mozilla could create chatrooms that synchronize to corresponding IRC channels, but be available over a protocol supported by most modern Instant Messaging clients that new users are more likely to have. This would facilitate easier 1-on-1 communication in a safe and secure way, possibly even making use of @mozillian.org account names.
* IdeaPlane
** http://ideaplane.com/


* syncs to IRC
=== Misc ===
* provides secure 1:1 and multiuser chatrooms
* phpBB? This seems to be extremely widely used, and is the first thing I think of in this realm. Dare I say it also has the benefit of familiarity for Mozillazine users.
* connect with Adium, Messages.app, Pidgin, etc


== Relevant Reading ==
== Relevant Reading ==


* [[Discussion_Forums/Problem_Statement]]
* https://wiki.mozilla.org/Discussion_Forums
* https://wiki.mozilla.org/Discussion_Forums
* https://wiki.mozilla.org/MozCampEU2012/Future_of_Discussion_Forums
* https://wiki.mozilla.org/MozCampEU2012/Future_of_Discussion_Forums
Confirmed users
95

edits