Received: from localhost ([::1]:40034 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eTbPk-0005t0-IB; Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:40:08 -0800 Received: from mail-vk0-f54.google.com ([209.85.213.54]:37779) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eTbPD-0005rr-Hj for llg-members@lojban.org; Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:39:37 -0800 Received: by mail-vk0-f54.google.com with SMTP id n2so15672695vkf.4 for ; Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:39:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=fUB1xAgWPkzH8XnEVlGG4q7e+Y5rjoIZ/3Ok8+4Lg3c=; b=JEEQ+BMy27reiHh8tsCP77qZLF9SscZe509MKxhuYrIsUXBkNDXLy9f7nT89vHRZOE Ui077YaBYEs8zORgeHmlwz9dDfs1aRgv8Yv3WgR8RmzdRqtyl2d7wB2VYOs/ONLm+1We bOepqm6qFFnQC8hoSKTsC4DmCAJGB8UEHEAKnMVjbMfYPXBMs8qXDvsK7A6Pkat6+pu+ WD/mKEFRgcA0pxX8RjBrgdq/Uaidknp1iT896SDTwbfVGntD/x7l0wbJrTh9PKBjLQRD FrsLgzKcxm8TPMGYc9wZe9mVS1U5rhhc2GAtKdohHTuiCW29CxEz/LUur8AYW4ppamgC wXwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=fUB1xAgWPkzH8XnEVlGG4q7e+Y5rjoIZ/3Ok8+4Lg3c=; b=uNDNH1ewXU7brR2kBhasSKf3NKOzObU+E0WCT7U15B6ba/JwQ7S+Gso9cBJWXerzBx A671H3l0rtLkMpGLunEJig1EAL8SVNpLrJQGeYpHl0QOHadT+9z503Qs0jyl6h3mYvzb u9H70dxr551CJQeZJrpuCPEsvWagYc5w8Wm6M3k+HVGAsq5UEpwwQMfCsAPJ2OU5zZfh qncz2LTQlC2EaepJbSAcRrc8z2K05FNbibcUh6bZJAQlGQKYVgCobqhxElOHGD6hOB/r 6KRcFYFcsSrlc3G5IgWejBWaG1wPhB6o0FDO44edz0tvE6TBWy3Bt12ptWuQkkyUnvKH HBjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mJTtXZNmHyAfwgAzDwilkk4zbjRQURQvVCAoqETqSxvaBWogGTz jVZJCDcT1EFIt66EUOYx53Ae5N626RbDwWCSLYg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosRSTxwjrc9gN2IdvkncGtQyIJT+tbbcuILbZ9bCnZe9vrSTGWmGOYrsh7vv6ASl25VLGwbViDSMtTFHdbBCKs= X-Received: by 10.31.228.6 with SMTP id b6mr23346922vkh.59.1514241568457; Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:39:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.27.18 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:39:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.176.27.18 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:39:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Creative Care Services Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2017 17:39:27 -0500 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_bar: -- Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Unfinished Business: Website, etc X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7540458016815666455==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============7540458016815666455== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c092f80caca28056131d67e" --94eb2c092f80caca28056131d67e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I have renamed this part of the BPFK thread so it will be easier to follow the various discussions. On Dec 25, 2017 08:02, "Gleki Arxokuna" wrote: 2017-12-25 15:11 GMT+03:00 guskant : > 2017-12-25 5:51 GMT+00:00 Gleki Arxokuna : > > > > > > The source of CLL is published on github.com and can be cloned anywhere. > > E.g. on can make a copy on framagit.org and gitlab.com > > The more copies the more chances this stuff won't be lost. > > > > Since the time CLL can be deployed from docker we nolonger depend on > Robin's > > servers in regard to CLL. > > doi la gleki > > Do you mean the repository governed by the Lojban Coders' Group? > https://github.com/lojban/cll > > I said "we need another place where plural responsible people and no > others can manage the contents", while the Lojban Coders' Group does > not consists of responsible people, but anarchists with no rule [1]. > There is no guarantee that they would not replace the CLL 1.1 with > their own CLL 2.0 as a new "official" version of the CLL. > It's a matter of minutes to clone CLL to another place. Do you have some technical problems? No server is ideal, lightning pu'i hit Google's servers once with losing sensitive users' data. > > > > > A backup of mw.lojban.org might be necessary though. > > > > If my motion in the previous LLG meeting were adopted, mw.lojban.org > would be free from any restriction as an "official" website, and then > it would be unnecessary to make a backup by the official body. > mw.lojban.org and Tiki has historical information. Your motions required either paying for new servers or no preservation of historical data (e.g. history of page editing). For now we can ask Web Admin to publish mediawiki dumps e.g. once a week so that anyone can download them and save in their secret bunkers. > > [1] > The fact that the Lojban Coders' Group does not respect BPFK decisions > was discussed on the public list. See Example 2.1 of the following > message: > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/u2tzLm74AQAJ There is no mechanism to respect BPFK's decisions. You said "plural responsible people" but Lojban Coders' Group has more than one LLG member. If all of them are not responsible then speak out what needs to be done. I can see at least 5 accounts apparently related to current LLG members and having merge permissions. How is a new group will be any better? Fear of forking CLL by non-LLG members is justifiable but how to justify the lack of rules+following action? > > > mi'e la guskant > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --94eb2c092f80caca28056131d67e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have renamed this part of the BPFK thread so it wi= ll be easier to follow the various discussions.=C2=A0

On Dec 25, 2017 08:02, "Gleki = Arxokuna" <gleki.is.m= y.name@gmail.com> wrote:


2017-12-25 15:11 GMT+03:00 guskant <= span dir=3D"ltr"><gusni.kantu@gmail.com>:
2017-12-25= 5:51 GMT+00:00 Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>:
>
>
> The source of CLL is published on github.com and can be cloned anywhere. > E.g. on can make a copy on framagit.org and gitlab.com
> The more copies the more chances this stuff won't be lost.
>
> Since the time CLL can be deployed from docker we nolonger depend on R= obin's
> servers in regard to CLL.

doi la gleki

Do you mean the repository governed by the Lojban Coders' Group?
https://github.com/lojban/cll

I said "we need another place where plural responsible people and no others can manage the contents", while the Lojban Coders' Group do= es
not consists of responsible people, but anarchists with no rule [1].
There is no guarantee that they would not replace the CLL 1.1 with
their own CLL 2.0 as a new "official" version of the CLL.

It's a matter of minutes to clone CL= L to another place. Do you have some technical problems? No server is ideal= , lightning pu'i hit Google's servers once with losing sensitive us= ers' data.




>
> A backup of mw.lojban.org might be necessary though.
>

If my motion in the previous LLG meeting were adopted, mw.lojban.org<= br> would be free from any restriction as an "official" website, and = then
it would be unnecessary to make a backup by the official body.

mw.lojban.org and Tiki has historical information. Your motions r= equired either paying for new servers or no preservation of historical data= (e.g. history of page editing).

For now we can as= k Web Admin to publish mediawiki dumps e.g. once a week so that anyone can = download them and save in their secret bunkers.

=C2=A0

[1]
The fact that the Lojban Coders' Group does not respect BPFK decisions<= br> was discussed on the public list. See Example 2.1 of the following
message:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/= lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/u2tzLm74AQAJ

There is no mechanism to respect BPFK's decisions.

You said "plural responsible people" but= =C2=A0Lojban Coders' Group has more than one LLG member. If all of them= are not responsible then speak out what needs to be done. I can see at lea= st 5 accounts apparently related to current LLG members and having merge pe= rmissions.

How is a new group will be any better?<= /div>

Fear of forking CLL by non-LLG members is justifia= ble but how to justify the lack of rules+following action?




mi'e la guskant

_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-= members


_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-= members


--94eb2c092f80caca28056131d67e-- --===============7540458016815666455== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============7540458016815666455==--