Here is what happened.
06.12.2012, 00:14, "Hans Hübner" <hans.huebner@gmail.com>:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have decided that after a few years, I do no longer want to be
> operating common-lisp.net - It was fun, but it is time to move on. I
> have been dealing with mailman administration (handling bounces,
> occasional password changes, list creation), and with user and project
> administration.
>
> I will be responding to RT requests until the end of this year.
> Afterwards, I won't do it anymore. I'll also revoke my own root
> access.
>
> If anyone reading this wants to seize responsibility and get some
> guidance from me, let me know.
>
> Cheers,
> Hans
06.12.2012, 00:58, "Drew Crampsie" <drewc@tech.coop>:
> Hey Hey,
> I will take over at this point, as my future plans for common-lisp.net involve, well, me being involved.
>
> I will chat with you on IRC about the details.
>
> Cheers,
> drewc
It was not mentioned on the clo-devel mailing list that a hosting problem
arose conicidentially with the Hahs step down.
It is gracious from Drew to volunteer for the work. It was a relief to hear somebody
will carry about the service, although the plans part was a bit threatening.
Also, the vision Drew had about better common-lisp.net is of course a good intentions.
Unfortunately, the results are unsatisfying so far. Currently the links to mailin list
description pages and archives are broken. Also, the home page is buggy,
comparing to the clean home page of the old common lisp net.
My impression is that the approach chosen by Drew requres much more time and
energy to complete than Drew has. And probably maintanance of the old
infrastructure would take less time per year than the work already done during
the unfinished migraion. It was probably easier to maintain the old infrastructure.
Hans, could you estimate from you experience during the last years, how much
man-hours per year it took to admin cl.net?
So, it is a political problem, in the sense that the situation is caused by the way
collective decisions or decisions affecting community are made.
On the one had, one person (user) can not tell another (admin) what to do.
I have not right to decide or voke how Drew spends his own time, money and energy.
If I want things another way, seems like I should volunteer to perform the work
and provide my own time and money.
On the other hand, if someone does significant changes in public service,
it makes sense to have confirmation from the community the changes
are welcome. If people don't like the changes, they could propose another
approach or find resources to implemente this another way.
So I agree, the current problems are caused by political issue:
Who "owns" cl.net? Who have right to object to changes or vote about the future?
How decisions are made?