web2py-users and web2py-developers

[mdipierro]

This group has changed name to:
web2py-users

Developers should request membership in:
http://groups.google.com/group/web2py_developers

Or email me to be added.
- You can be a developer if you have contributed to web2py, NOT if you
plant to contribute to web2py. In order to be a developer you must
also be a member of the web2py-users list and help other users.
- I ultimately decide who is in and who is out.

ATTENTION!!! There is also a list called "web2py-developer" (different
from web2py_developers). I did not create it, I do not know who did. I
do not recognize it unless I am giving ownership.

This list should be limited to answer questions from users and not to
have discussions about future.

Massimo

[mdipierro]

CORRECTION:

user web2py-developers instead of web2py_developers instead. I deleted
the latter. You need to sign up.

Massimo

[rev]

Hi Massimo,

The description of web2py-users still says:
Developers should also join:
http://groups.google.com/group/web2py_de velopers

The underscore should be a dash, and there's a space in the text (URL
is correct though).

rev

[A. C. Censi]

Hi

Massimo, greetings from Brazil. Or perhaps from this last actions
hould I say Heil!

I have been following the web2py community, because I feel that is
very interesting effort in bringing another python framework that is
very ingenious and, from my frustrated developer view (mainly because
I could not be a developer, a developer's manager), a very bright one,
mainly from your intense participation.

Creating a developers group can be a good decision from a benefactor
dictator, but restriciting the view of the messages from outside the
group seems to be a backward retreat in a time that web2py needs to
have all the exposition the technical brightness deserves. Why the
developers should be a restricted community to this level? Reserving
the right to post i think could be acceptable, but restricting
reading, seems to be too much, and, by the way, with the teacher soul
that the Massimo di Piero the developer puts on every reply in the
list, even for the most obvious one.

Obviously, I would continue to follow the community (in with I am
allowed), but, with all the same feelings of your meritorius work
deserves, I think I should protest.

Perhaps, you are upset by the questions posted in the lists recently,
about roadmap, documentation, Django comparisons, etc.

I should confess, that, at first, I thaugh this post was a fake one.
But as the developers list is blocked, it seems that the nighmare is
more real.

Anyway, excuse me if this is too harsh or for any overreaction in
writing, as I am not a ntive english speaker.

Regards

A. C. Censi

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 7:28 PM, mdipierro<mdip...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>
> This group has changed name to:

> web2py-users,

--
A. C. Censi
accensi [em] gmail [ponto] com
accensi [em] montreal [ponto] com [ponto] br

[mdipierro]

Sorry that was not intentional. I just set it up in a hurry.

Now all messages are readable (there are none yet)

You did well to bring this up. Please check that it is fixed on your
side.

To be a member you have to apply and I have to approve. If you have
contributed to web2py significantly or have otherwise demonstrated
knowledge of web2py source code, you will be admitted.

Massimo

[mdipierro]

One more thing... this is not at all intended to exclude people from
important conversations.

If you feel one way or another you can still bring it up here.

It is just that sometime some comments may be taken out of context
from new users and be interpreted in the wrong way.

Let's see how it works out. If you have any suggestion to improve let
me know.

Massimo

[Tim Michelsen]

> Or email me to be added.
> - You can be a developer if you have contributed to web2py, NOT if you
> plant to contribute to web2py. In order to be a developer you must
> also be a member of the web2py-users list and help other users.
> - I ultimately decide who is in and who is out.

I may suggest to grant these selected developers editing rights to the
web2py website.

Then, they could update roadmap & how-to-contribute pages.

[Yarko Tymciurak]

based on past experience, I don't like this idea... 
I think Massimo should control / decide, and more appropriately someone responsible for one thing should be a gatekeeper (as opposed to "everyone" in a group).  This is consistent with what other project spaces do.

 

[Joe Barnhart]

I am surprised at this division of groups. Web2py does not have so
much traffic that it is a burden to have all messages in one group.
The intent is *precisely* to exclude people from certain
conversations. There really can be no other reason for setting up a
"developers" group with gated write access. The answer to "certain
comments taken out of context" is more and better communication, not
restricted lists of high priests vs. commoners.

This strikes me as very heavy-handed and autocratic. This is not a
good sign for our project. You have set the barrier for participation
in web2py very high by this move. Honestly I am very surprised that
anybody (esp. Massimo) thinks this is a good idea.

Warm regards,

Joe Barnhart

[Yarko Tymciurak]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Joe Barnhart <joe.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:

I am surprised at this division of groups.  Web2py does not have so
much traffic that it is a burden to have all messages in one group.
The intent is *precisely* to exclude people from certain
conversations.  There really can be no other reason for setting up a
"developers" group with gated write access.  The answer to "certain
comments taken out of context" is more and better communication, not
restricted lists of high priests vs. commoners.

Joe -

This is your interpretation (and not the only one).   This was a suggestion from this list.

A mixture of topics was confusing and distracting people who just have use questions (as opposed to strategy, long term vision, etc.).

I interpret the limited write status (a starting state) as one specifically useful to keep discussions focused by people with longer experience, precisely so things stay constructive (don't devolve into opinion wars, etc.).

You are entitled to your opinions and interpretations - but that is what they are: your interpretations (and NOT  "...no other reason...").

Own it - YOU don't like the split;  YOU would do it differently; YOU are suspicious of the intent or motivation.

_I_ am not.

- Yarko
 

[waTR]

Let me just say that this is a positive step that was needed. Here are
some benefits so everyone is clear:
1. Fosters more of a team atmosphere among developers (internal team)
2. Gives Massimo a better idea about who are the start contributors
among the team, and can therefore invite them into the administrative
control role (i.e. control website, etc.).
3. Gives the rest of the users a chance to see that there is active
development going-on
4. Keeps the web2py-users page clean from internal advanced web2py
developer chatter
5. Makes developers feel special ;P which they BADLY need :D (I am
not one on web2py). Recognition will motivate them even further to
take this framework where it could not go before.
6. It is a sign that this framework has reached a stage in its life
where it must grow/evolve--this means it is prospering!! Users should
rejoice!

beers at /pub for everyone!


- Happy web2py user





On Jul 18, 11:10 am, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:

[DenesL]

Joe: I have sided with you many times but not on this one.

A cleaner division between users (a.k.a commoners --giggle--) who want
to use web2py without knowing what is under the hood and developers
(a.k.a high priests --LOL--) who make an extra effort to delve into
the innards and into strategic thinking, is healthy IMHO.

Plus I like my new purple robe and pointy hat (sorry... I could not
resist).

Denes.

[Yarko Tymciurak]

heheheeee ....

Oh!  and don't forget those fance, start studded gloves, with the fingertips conveniently cut off for typing on your keyboard, while giving _much_ better control of that Wand!  *smirk*
 

Denes.

[Yarko Tymciurak]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Yarko Tymciurak <yar...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 1:52 PM, DenesL <dene...@yahoo.ca> wrote:

Joe: I have sided with you many times but not on this one.

A cleaner division between users (a.k.a commoners --giggle--) who want
to use web2py without knowing what is under the hood and developers
(a.k.a high priests --LOL--)  who make an extra effort to delve into
the innards and into strategic thinking, is healthy IMHO.

Plus I like my new purple robe and pointy hat (sorry... I could not
resist).

heheheeee ....

(er ... still having trouble typing w/ them ;-):

Oh!  and don't forget those fancy, star- studded gloves, with the fingertips conveniently cut off for typing on your keyboard, while giving _much_ better control of that Wand!  *smirk*
 

Denes.

[mdipierro]

We should not confuse freedom of expression with transparency and with
democracy. You have freedom of expression here and people are not
being censored for what they say. There is no plan to change that. You
also have transparency. The web2py-developers list is world readable
although it is new so there i nothing in there. This is because it is
in everybody interest to get as much feedback as possible from users.

Yet, this is not a democracy. The fact that a project is open source
(and you can us it for free) does not mean that users have the same
rights as the original copyright holder(s). I welcome your suggestions
about technical issues and about management but not complaints.

If something is given to you for free you have the option to accept it
(use it), you have the option to return a gift (contribute), but you
do not have the complain to complain.

It is my interest to keep this project as open as possible and as open
as any other GPL2 project. But it is important to distinguish people
who contribute to it from people who do not. It is my intention to be
relatively loose on the definition of "contribute". Some people have
contributed with a lot of code. Some people have contributed with
documentation. Some people have contributed by testing and reporting
bugs. Some people have contributed by blogging about web2py. Some have
volunteered to help with management issues. Other have built apps with
web2py.

I am not going to rank contributors but it is my responsibility to
acknowledge the people who have given back. I owe it to them. We all
do. This is good because it provides an incentive to do more. It
informs users about who they can direct questions to and whose answers
they can trust.

I am not selecting anybody a priori. People who have given back can
ask to join web2py-developers and their work will be acknowledged, a
posteriori. The role of various people has already being acknowledged
in the who.html page although I need to do a better job. If I have
made mistakes please help me correct them.

Said this. I do not think that the voice of the developers is more
important than anybody else's voice when it comes to setting a
roadmap. We will set a public web2py were people can contribute to the
roadmap by proposing items and voting. The role of the developers is
to decide what is feasible and when. My role is to decide what is
compatible with my vision for web2py and what is not. The most
critical issue for the future of web2py is that it does not get
corrupted. Web2py was designed to be small, fast, simple and coherent.
It is my job to keep it that way.

Massimo


On Jul 18, 2:03 pm, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Bottiger]

I can't shake the feeling that I spurred this move.

I might be a newcomer to Web2Py, but I have already sunk some time
into studying Web2Py such as finding broken links on the main page and
benchmarking the bundled version of flup (which should not be used in
a production environment because of GIL) compared to the official flup
that has prefork. I have had made code contributions to other open-
source projects, and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking
more difficult.

[Hans Donner]

Bottiger,

"and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking more difficult"

in fact, it is not: you can still contribute what you want, you can
still post it here or send it to massimo - please do so.
Roadmap, or no roadmap; dev group or not.

H

[waTR]

Bottiger,

Wait and see. Don't give up just yet. You may find a diamond in this
lump of coal yet.

While it may seem like you won't be able to contribute, it is quite
the contrary. You will be able to join forces with others making
similar contributions and go on to do great things together. The
developers deserve the same. But it would not be useful to have our
conversations regarding what to fix that is not code-related be
intermingled with the developer chatter. I personally don't care what
they are working on, but I do care about the site, and documentation,
and other non-coding issues.

I personally have no interest, currently, in contributing code (mostly
because I don't know what to contribute), but I do know other things
to contribute. I want a place where I can discuss with others like you
and I, and work together on something big.

I also don't want to flood the users group with this discussion.
Imagine making a post about a question, and having your post end up on
page 2 where no one will see it because of other messages related to
80/20 discussion and roadmap, and all sorts of MANAGEMENT issues. I
would be pretty pissed, don't know about you. All I want on the users
group is to get an answer to a simple question. I don't care about
road-maps and those things. When I want to read that, I will happily
go into the web2py group that is specific to those topics.

[Yarko Tymciurak]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Bottiger <bott...@gmail.com> wrote:

I can't shake the feeling that I spurred this move.

It was in the ecology already, naturally... 
 

......

 

I have had made code contributions to other open-
source projects, and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking
more difficult.

I don't understand - what did you see that makes you think it will be more difficult to make contributions to web2py?

Is this because of Joe's opinions? (he used some "namecalling" in his post which I have issues with; no productive options or observations, and certainly not any show of openness)

[Bottiger]

Having been somewhat experienced in the politics of open source, I
cannot say this is the case.

I have experienced occasions where useful contributions I have spent
significant time working on ignored by the admins because they wanted
to keep the number of contributors low, or they simply did not like
them.

A public example of this, as many of you may remember is Con Kolivas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Con_Kolivas

He vastly improved the scheduler for the Linux kernel, but it was not
committed. Instead, a Linux developer incumbent, Ingo Molnar
reimplemented it and merely delegated Con Kolivas to the footnotes.

Moving development discussion into web2py-developers, which is by one
person's invite only, seems to be moving towards this direction.

On Jul 18, 1:44 pm, Hans Donner <hans.don...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Bottiger,
>
> "and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking more difficult"
>
> in fact, it is not: you can still contribute what you want, you can
> still post it here or send it to massimo - please do so.
> Roadmap, or no roadmap; dev group or not.
>
> H
>

[mdipierro]

I think I see Bottiger problem. He feels he cannot be in the web2py-
developers list until he is a contributor and therefore, until then,
he will not be able to contribute to some of the discussion.

I want to clarify that this is not the case for the following reasons:
anybody on the other list will be required to be also here and you can
read those discussion so you can follow-up on the here if you consider
this appropriate.

Let's see how this works out. If this does not work well we can change
the model and open web2py-developers to everybody interested in it (as
with web2py-users) and find a better/different way to acknowledge
contributors that membership in a mailing list.

Nothing is set in stone. Different people want different things and
this is my first real open source project. We are all going to do
mistakes and we will work to correct them. Always assume that we are
doing hat we do to be more inclusive and not less inclusive.

Massimo


On Jul 18, 4:03 pm, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:

[mdipierro]

It is not my interest to keep the number of contributors low. Quite
the opposite. I do not think you will find anybody whose work has been
ignored.

Nevertheless it is my interest to minimize changes to web2py. I need
people to help improve the docs, write tests, test more, make it look
sleeker, write killer apps. I am going to resist changes to make
web2py different (disclaimer: I have been proven wrong here a few
times).

I do not know the cases you refer to but as far as web2py is concerned
you are a contributors if and only if your contribution is accepted.
It has happened before that somebody implemented a needed feature in a
way that I did not like. My policy in this case is to use those parts
of the contributed solution that I liked, rewrite the rest, and still
acknowledge the contributors as the author. Of course this holds as
long there is some original work in the contribution and if the
proposed feature is included.

Let me also give you example of contributions that will not be
accepted:
1) anything that breaks backward compatibility.
2) removal of feature
3) anything that substantially increase the complexity of the source
code
4) anything that increases the complexity from the point of new users
(including cluttering the interface)
5) integration of web2py with other ORMs or other template engines.
(You can do it. If there is a barrier to do it we will try to remove
those barrier. But we will not take steps to encourage this because it
goes against the web2py goal to make it easy to port applications.)

Massimo

On Jul 18, 4:12 pm, Bottiger <bottig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Having been somewhat experienced in the politics of open source, I
> cannot say this is the case.
>
> I have experienced occasions where useful contributions I have spent
> significant time working on ignored by the admins because they wanted
> to keep the number of contributors low, or they simply did not like
> them.
>

> A public example of this, as many of you may remember is Con Kolivas.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Con_Kolivas

[Yarko Tymciurak]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 4:36 PM, mdipierro <mdip...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:

It is not my interest to keep the number of contributors low. Quite
the opposite. I do not think you will find anybody whose work has been
ignored.

Nevertheless it is my interest to minimize changes to web2py. I need
people to help improve the docs, write tests, test more, make it look
sleeker, write killer apps. I am going to resist changes to make
web2py different (disclaimer: I have been proven wrong here a few
times).

This is an important point:  

Massimo's motivation (no change) is good, and resistance breaks down in the face of good reasons, good ideas - exactly as it should.  I encourage continuing this important shaping resistance,, since it is a well functioning one.

- Yarko

[Hans Donner]

So far with web2py I have not seen this, and from Massimo's reply it
is not the intention to do so.
And seeing from this list, neither will the rest.

And regarding contribution in source, Massimo will even block those
that come from the 'developers' when they do not meet his criteria for
web2py. Perhaps calling this group of people 'developers' is slightly
misleading. In stead of looking at the name, look at the intention.

[AchipA]

Just to chime in... Such a split of lists is perfectly normal and does
seem to work pretty well for other projects I'm interested in (the
OSGeo projects, Maemo, etc). In fact, the usual layout is a trinity of
lists - users, developers and community (the last one encompassing
topics that are not technical).

Also, having your patch not accepted is something you have to learn to
live with if you contribute to ANY oss project. Some of my own patches
are in web2py, some of them got implemented by Massimo in a way he
felt was better and some got rejected (and consequently I keep as a
separate patchset). No biggie, that's the way things work in all open
source projects - and still way better than having a binary blob you
can't touch and have to live with as-is.

On Jul 18, 11:12 pm, Bottiger <bottig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Having been somewhat experienced in the politics of open source, I
> cannot say this is the case.
>
> I have experienced occasions where useful contributions I have spent
> significant time working on ignored by the admins because they wanted
> to keep the number of contributors low, or they simply did not like
> them.
>

> A public example of this, as many of you may remember is Con Kolivas.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Con_Kolivas

[Fran]

On Jul 18, 10:20 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> I think I see Bottiger problem. He feels he cannot be in the web2py-
> developers list until he is a contributor and therefore, until then,
> he will not be able to contribute to some of the discussion.
>
> I want to clarify that this is not the case for the following reasons:
> anybody on the other list will be required to be also here and you can
> read those discussion so you can follow-up on the here if you consider
> this appropriate.
>
> Let's see how this works out. If this does not work well we can change
> the model and open web2py-developers to everybody interested in it (as
> with web2py-users) and find a better/different way to acknowledge
> contributors that membership in a mailing list.
>
> Nothing is set in stone. Different people want different things and
> this is my first real open source project. We are all going to do
> mistakes and we will work to correct them. Always assume that we are
> doing hat we do to be more inclusive and not less inclusive.

I must confess that I was somewhat taken aback by the initial split of
lists - even though it is normal in many projects & also the issue
with list load increasing is causing threads to get hidden (I read the
group via the web).

I think the main issue I have is the restriction on membership.
I would personally open up membership of that group to all - I don't
see that recognition is best done through that form...ultimately the
changelogs & archived posts are sufficient but the who.html page is a
nice bonus.

Having people able to post to web2py-developers doesn't automatically
mean that they have any extra say in the project - ideas are taken-up
based on their merits & their implementability, as-always.

F

[mdipierro]

I have no strong object to the idea of removing every prerequisite
from admission to web2py-developers.
But I still think we need to figure out a way to better acknowledge
the role of contributors.

Moreover so many people have contributed so far we should also start
thinking about protecting copyright issues (both protecting web2py
from possible contamination of copyrighted code, and protecting the
contributors by making sure they retain rights on their contributed
code).

We should look how other projects handle these issues.

Massimo

[Fran]

On Jul 19, 11:14 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> I have no strong object to the idea of removing every prerequisite
> from admission to web2py-developers.

Good :)

> But I still think we need to figure out a way to better acknowledge
> the role of contributors.

Have contributors stated they want more acknowledgement?

> Moreover so many people have contributed so far we should also start
> thinking about protecting copyright issues (both protecting web2py
> from possible contamination of copyrighted code, and protecting the
> contributors by making sure they retain rights on their contributed
> code).
> We should look how other projects handle these issues.

This is usually done through a CLA:
http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/HowToContribute#ContributorsLicenseAgreements

Contributors sign-over their rights to the project.
Having this be a Foundation rather than an individual could be useful
here (although personally I'm fine either way).

F

[Yarko Tymciurak]

On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:36 AM, Fran <franc...@googlemail.com> wrote:

On Jul 19, 11:14 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> I have no strong object to the idea of removing every prerequisite
> from admission to web2py-developers.

Good :) 

> But I still think we need to figure out a way to better acknowledge
> the role of contributors.

Have contributors stated they want more acknowledgement?

This is part of the point.... community, if knowing who area contributors are have a better sense of expertise;  both in something to strive for, and something for others to see, this provides benefits...

> Moreover so many people have contributed so far we should also start
> thinking about protecting copyright issues (both protecting web2py
> from possible contamination of copyrighted code, and protecting the
> contributors by making sure they retain rights on their contributed
> code).
> We should look how other projects handle these issues.

This is usually done through a CLA:
http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/HowToContribute#ContributorsLicenseAgreements

Massimo sent me something to comment on the other day that was derived from a Sun agreement;
While these are all interesting, ultimately we need a lawyer's opinion on what would best protect intent of project and contributors.

(Perhaps Van could suggest something?  I have not yet read his "Intellectual Property & Open Source", but it is on the shelf staring at me...)

- Yarko

[mdipierro]

welcome from Beijing.

Yarko is referring the Clojure agreement.
http://clojure.org/space/showimage/ca.pdf

Somebody pointed me to it. I do not have a strong feeling but seems
clears and concise.

massimo

On Jul 19, 6:04 am, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:36 AM, Fran <francisb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 19, 11:14 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> > > I have no strong object to the idea of removing every prerequisite
> > > from admission to web2py-developers.
>
> > Good :)
>
> > > But I still think we need to figure out a way to better acknowledge
> > > the role of contributors.
>
> > Have contributors stated they want more acknowledgement?
>
> This is part of the point.... community, if knowing who area contributors
> are have a better sense of expertise;  both in something to strive for, and
> something for others to see, this provides benefits...
>
>
>
> > > Moreover so many people have contributed so far we should also start
> > > thinking about protecting copyright issues (both protecting web2py
> > > from possible contamination of copyrighted code, and protecting the
> > > contributors by making sure they retain rights on their contributed
> > > code).
> > > We should look how other projects handle these issues.
>
> > This is usually done through a CLA:
>

> >http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/HowToContribute#ContributorsLicenseAg...

[weheh]

Bottiger, you may be jumping to conclusions prematurely. My experience
to date with this group is that it is inclusive, not exclusive. That
Massimo et. al. are interested in positive, constructive, even
revolutionary ideas, not flame wars. Love, not hate. Peace, not war.
Separating developers from users is natural and necessary as the
web2py base expands. Make sure your intentions are in the right place.
If you like web2py, contribute. If your contribution is a good one and
in scope, it will most likely receive due consideration and be
accepted. If accepted, it will be acknowledged. If rejected,
hopefully, an explanation will be given, but don't take it personally.
If you're worried you're contribution will be out of scope, discuss it
with the group first before spending time on it. There seems to be no
shortage of words exchanged in this forum.

[Anand Vaidya]

I support the split too. This type of split is quite common in mailing
lists. In the long term, it makes easier for everyone. Please make the
-dev list readable by anyone (or atleast by web2py-users)

The dev list can focus more on discussions on long term / future
plans, architectural issues etc. It lets the developers focus on
complex issues without being distracted by the constant chatter on the
-users list

The -users list is more for end users, casual visitors, beginners, for
support questions etc.

I just wanted to ask one question: Is there a security@ mail address
or mail alias to report security issues (not that I have found any, so
far)?

Regards
Anand



On Jul 18, 6:28 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> This group has changed name to:web2py-users
>
> Developers should request membership in:http://groups.google.com/group/web2py_developers

>
> Or email me to be added.

> - You can be a developer if you have contributed toweb2py, NOT if you
> plant to contribute toweb2py. In order to be a developer you must

> also be a member of theweb2py-userslist and help otherusers.
> - I ultimately decide who is in and who is out.
>

> ATTENTION!!! There is also a list called "web2py-developer" (different
> from web2py_developers). I did not create it, I do not know who did. I
> do not recognize it unless I am giving ownership.
>
> This list should be limited to answer questions fromusersand not to
> have discussions about future.
>
> Massimo

[mdipierro]

On Jul 21, 8:17 am, Anand Vaidya <anandvaidya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I support the split too. This type of split is quite common in mailing
> lists. In the long term, it makes easier for everyone. Please make the
> -dev list readable by anyone (or atleast by web2py-users)

It is. Is it not?

> The dev list can focus more on discussions on long term / future
> plans, architectural issues etc. It lets the developers focus on
> complex issues without being distracted by the constant chatter on the
> -users list
>
> The -users list is more for end users, casual visitors, beginners, for
> support questions etc.
>
> I just wanted to ask one question: Is there a security@   mail address
> or mail alias to report security issues (not that I have found any, so
> far)?

No there is not but you can email me and/or open a google code ticket.

[Yarko Tymciurak]

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:04 AM, mdipierro <mdip...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:

On Jul 21, 8:17 am, Anand Vaidya <anandvaidya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I support the split too. This type of split is quite common in mailing
> lists. In the long term, it makes easier for everyone. Please make the
> -dev list readable by anyone (or atleast by web2py-users)

It is. Is it not?

Cornfirmed:  Anonymous access to the dev group works.