Have a conversation about migrating from GNU Mailman 2.1 to GNU Mailman 3.0
Open, Stalled, NormalPublic

Tokens
"Like" token, awarded by Pcoombe."Like" token, awarded by MarcoAurelio."Like" token, awarded by He7d3r."Like" token, awarded by MGChecker."Mountain of Wealth" token, awarded by Man77."Love" token, awarded by Steinsplitter."Like" token, awarded by Slaporte."The World Burns" token, awarded by Vituzzu."Like" token, awarded by Addshore."Love" token, awarded by greg."Like" token, awarded by dr0ptp4kt.
Assigned To
None
Authored By
AzaToth, Jul 6 2013

Description

As a Wikimedian I want to be able to follow discussions (read, reply, create) per project or theme in a convenient way, whether through email client on a (mobile) device, webmail on a (mobile) device, or through a web interface of the discussion system itself, so I'm up to date informed about what is going on and can join the conversation anytime as I like.

Alternatives to consider:

  • Keep Mailman 2.1
  • Migrate to Mailman 3.0 which has a new Django-based web user interface for end users and list administrators named Postorius (not yet officilally sanctioned by GNU)
  • Consider Discourse as web interface for Mailman mailing list (requires development of synchronization)
  • Consider (flow enabled) talk pages on wiki - add support for reply by email to topics on a talk page for example

Not a user story (original task description)
We should update Mailman to version 3.

The new version, among others, stores hashed passwords, which could have minimized the impact of last weeks security incident

Details

Reference
bz50864
There are a very large number of changes, so older changes are hidden. Show Older Changes

Would really like this for the ability to search the internal (administrivia) lists in particular.

JohnLewis changed the task status from Open to Stalled.Jun 17 2015, 8:24 PM

Echoing of Faidon, to avoid confusing marking this as stalled. Upgrading to Version 3 will come, but it won't be soon and very very likely won't be this year. While this can change, 2.1.18 is a priority along with moving mailman to a Jessie machine.

Restricted Application added a subscriber: Matanya. · View Herald TranscriptJul 7 2015, 10:26 PM
Meno25 added a subscriber: Meno25.Jul 9 2015, 3:00 PM
RobLa added a subscriber: RobLa.Jul 28 2015, 5:42 AM
JohnLewis lowered the priority of this task from Normal to Lowest.Aug 6 2015, 9:31 PM
revi added a subscriber: revi.Sep 2 2015, 5:17 PM
greg added a comment.Sep 25 2015, 10:30 PM

What are the explicit blockers of this upgrade, now? I guess one that might not be a task is "time and prioritization" but that's fine.

Blockers:

  • 2.1 upgrade support for Mailman 3 (serious and tested, right now it's 'partial' and patched in 2010)
  • Debian upstream packaging (likely next Debian distro)
  • Actually to be used elsewhere in a large deployment.

Time and priorities are indeed a blocker as well as this would be a more serious upgrade and potentially risky as well.

There are really no blockers from the WMF perspective. It's all upstream stuff we can't control like development priorities and distro packaging.

greg awarded a token.Sep 25 2015, 11:25 PM
Elitre added a subscriber: Elitre.Nov 13 2015, 12:44 PM

From @Legoktm on IRC: Fedora is switching to Mailman 3 next week: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailman3_Migration

That will satisfy the "actually to be used elsewhere" blocker.

We also had a security incident (http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/11/12/mailman-security-incident/) which bit us especially hard because Mailman 2 stores mailing list passwords in cleartext.

KTC added a subscriber: KTC.Nov 13 2015, 7:01 PM
Man77 awarded a token.Nov 15 2015, 2:16 PM
Man77 added a subscriber: Man77.
MartinK updated the task description. (Show Details)Nov 15 2015, 3:36 PM
MartinK raised the priority of this task from Lowest to High.
Aklapper lowered the priority of this task from High to Normal.Nov 16 2015, 10:44 AM

This is blocked on external parameters (see T52864#1676829) hence setting priority to normal here.

He7d3r added a subscriber: He7d3r.
KuboF added a subscriber: KuboF.Nov 17 2015, 2:24 PM
-jem- added a subscriber: -jem-.Nov 19 2015, 10:03 AM

@Legoktm and I both replied to on meta:Talk:Discourse about this upgrade. Update?

Update?

Upstream created a new patch level release https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/blob/3.0.1/src/mailman/docs/NEWS.rst . No new features like upgrade support, but the next minor release will have some improvements for upgrades.

As before this is still lacking people working on it. With upstream on migration support (without further knowledge and testing I don't know to what extend actual software changes are needed here); on packaging the upgrade for Debian; and on testing and applying that on our installation. There are no current, real external blockers (, while this might look like I'm disagreeing with T52864#1676829 , I think it is just saying the same from a different perspective).

@RobLa-WMF: Are you willing to resource this?

jayvdb added a subscriber: jayvdb.Jan 20 2016, 12:43 PM

@RobLa-WMF: Are you willing to resource this?

@JanZerebecki - I don't have authority to resource this. I was hoping @mark or someone from Operations would respond, but I believe that so far, all of the momentum seems to be around T124690: Successful pilot of Discourse on https://discourse.wmflabs.org/ as an alternative to wikimedia-l mailinglist.

Tgr added a comment.Mar 21 2016, 1:19 AM

@JanZerebecki - I don't have authority to resource this. I was hoping @mark or someone from Operations would respond, but I believe that so far, all of the momentum seems to be around T124690: Successful pilot of Discourse on https://discourse.wmflabs.org/ as an alternative to wikimedia-l mailinglist.

If by "momentum" you mean WMF resourcing than so far neither of those have any.

ori added a subscriber: ori.Mar 21 2016, 1:27 AM

I was hoping @mark or someone from Operations would respond

@faidon did, in T52864#954874 above.

In T52864#2138089, @Tgr wrote:

@JanZerebecki - I don't have authority to resource this. I was hoping @mark or someone from Operations would respond, but I believe that so far, all of the momentum seems to be around T124690: Successful pilot of Discourse on https://discourse.wmflabs.org/ as an alternative to wikimedia-l mailinglist.

If by "momentum" you mean WMF resourcing than so far neither of those have any.

Nope, I mean interest in spite of explicit WMF resourcing. @AdHuikeshoven has been building interest in the pilot he's been running for the past few weeks. My understanding is that the goal of T124690 is to make a case for applying WMF funds toward a Wikimedia community discussion replacement for Mailman2 mailing lists. Discourse seems to be the only alternative that is being seriously considered right now, and that's mainly due to Ad's efforts.

I understand why Operations hasn't been eager to take this on. The codfw-rollout clearly takes precedent for Operations. This past quarter has been pretty tumultuous outside of the Ops team. I only took interest today because someone else brought up Discourse, and that caused me to look here and notice that I hadn't replied to Jan.

@RobLa-WMF , thanks for the kind words. The status of Discourse is a pilot a test and generates feedback about what people like and what people don't like. There are some strong preferences to receive updates or notifications by mail about discussions and to be able not only to reply by mail to a discussion thread but also to be able to create a new thread. Some people have been asking for synchronization of mailing lists and Discourse. As, if and when that materializes Discourse can or will coexist alongside Mailman mailing lists, just like gmane coexists alongside Mailman. Discourse provides an alternative web interface and some extras. GNU Mailman 3.0 also provides a web interface. After an updrade to Mailman 3 there might be a reduced level of interest in moving to Discourse.

We are all in the same Wikimedia movement in which there are over 900 wiki websites. Project related discussion can and should be primarily on wiki. For movement wide discussion there is meta, and those discussion can and should be primarily on wiki. (This discussion should be on meta, or on mediawiki.) The mailing lists exist because they all exist for too long.

@sumanah is on the Mailman team. I'll bet she has an insider perspective on what kind of challenges you'll face when migrating from Mailman 2.1 to Mailman 3.0, or how long it will take for Mailman 3.1 to arrive.

@brion came with a challenge to integrate core concepts of mediawiki in Discourse. In the long term our goal should be to integrate Mailman mailing list features or Discourse features in the (Flow enabled) talk pages of Wikimedia project wiki websites. One of those features is to follow a discussion by mail, not only reading, but also replying and creating.

(Going to rewrite the task description to a user story)

AdHuikeshoven renamed this task from Upgrade Mailman to version 3 to Have a conversation about migrating from GNU Mailman 2.1 to GNU Mailman 3.0.Mar 21 2016, 7:10 PM
AdHuikeshoven updated the task description. (Show Details)

@sumanah is on the Mailman team. I'll bet she has an insider perspective on what kind of challenges you'll face when migrating from Mailman 2.1 to Mailman 3.0, or how long it will take for Mailman 3.1 to arrive.

I was volunteering on Mailman and am not right now. But here's a July 12th post by Mailman maintainer Barry Warsaw on the mailman developers' list in which he recognizes that 3.1 really needs to be released soon. (Mailman 3.1 is the version where the maintainers advise 2.0 users to upgrade and believe the upgrade path is smooth.) I predict Mailman 3.1 will be out by the end of 2016, and my bet would be that it'll be before the end of September.

People who'd like to know when 3.1 is out can subscribe to the Mailman announcement mailing list which is very low-volume.

sumanah removed a subscriber: sumanah.Jul 24 2016, 2:40 AM
Man77 removed a subscriber: Man77.Nov 10 2016, 10:43 PM

Hello. What's the status of this one? It'd be interesting to have our mailing lists system updated. Regards.

Regarding Debian packages for GNU Mailman 3, see https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=799292 for the issues.

Re https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-August/088350.html , I think adding Mailman 3 to translatewiki.net would a reasonable first step to increase awareness and help its development. Erik, are you willing to open this discussion in the relevant venues?

A second step could be switching some non-WMF Wikimedia mailman installations. https://intern.wikimedia.ch/lists/listinfo/ seems a better candidate than http://mailman.wikimedia.it/listinfo because they seem to run on more up to date software (and they have a more diverse userbase, including some international mailing lists). Both are run by volunteers with little time though, AFAIK.

JFTR, the first maiman 3 package has been uploaded to Debian now: https://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mailman3-core.html

@MoritzMuehlenhoff Does that help or ease the suggested migration? Thanks.

Elitre updated the task description. (Show Details)Oct 9 2017, 2:17 PM

@MoritzMuehlenhoff Does that help or ease the suggested migration? Thanks.

The mailman 3 packaging in Debian isn't complete yet (missing the web interface ATM), but when it's complete that would certainly ease a migration to mailman 3.

Legoktm added a subscriber: herron.Jan 26 2018, 9:42 PM

I briefly talked with @herron about this today. I think we are still blocked on the lack of Debian packaging. Looking at https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?email=pkg-mailman-hackers%40lists.alioth.debian.org, none of the packages were included in stretch (and some aren't in testing yet), so we'd either need stretch backports or wait until the buster release.

Restricted Application added a subscriber: alanajjar. · View Herald TranscriptJan 26 2018, 9:42 PM

mailman3-core, mailman3-hyperkitty, postorius and mailmanclient have been accepted into stretch-backports today.

Does that mean we can start considering our migration?

That's dependent on goal planning / road map considerations, I only meant to point out the availability in backports since it was mentioned earlier on this task.

mailman3-core, mailman3-hyperkitty, postorius and mailmanclient have been accepted into stretch-backports today.

@Legoktm @herron where does this put us now then? Thanks.

I think we need to lobby/convince/remind @faidon and other roadmap deciders to allocate resources for this :)

This comment was removed by MarcoAurelio.
Reedy updated the task description. (Show Details)May 11 2018, 6:24 PM
Reedy removed subscribers: wikibugs-l-list, JohnLewis.

I think we need to lobby/convince/remind @faidon and other roadmap deciders to allocate resources for this :)

Hello @faidon. Do you think we can move on this? Thanks.

Hi. Any status updates here? Thanks.

Hi. Any status updates here? Thanks.

If you are in a hurry to switch to mailman 3, maybe you could talk with the development team about increasing its translations as I suggested?

Re https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-August/088350.html , I think adding Mailman 3 to translatewiki.net would a reasonable first step to increase awareness and help its development. Erik, are you willing to open this discussion in the relevant venues?

I am not in any hurry. I am just requesting an status update.

chasemp added a subscriber: chasemp.Nov 6 2018, 6:37 PM
Meno25 removed a subscriber: Meno25.Fri, Nov 23, 7:48 AM