[Wikimedia-l] Mailing list usability: Observations about Mailman 3

Hi folks, The topic of list usability has come up here a few times in the past, and efforts have been made over the years to pilot alternative forum systems like Discourse, or to redirect more conversations to talk pages. Yet the mailing lists continue to be used for a significant share of long-form Wikimedia discussions and announcements (see stats at [1]). There's a Phabricator ticket [2], currently marked as stalled, for upgrading Wikimedia's mailing list software, Mailman, to the newest version. Mailman 3 is a complete rewrite, and this upgrade would unquestionably be a major team-level effort. I've recently set up a Mailman 3 install [3] (without archive migration) and wanted to share some observations that may help with a decision to stay on the Mailman 2 line or attempt an upgrade. Sent to wikimedia-l because I think this discussion deserves a bit more mind-share beyond the developer community. To see an active Mailman 3 community, check out the Fedora project's: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/ == The good == You can make a user account (including with third party providers, opening the door for Wikimedia account integration), which makes managing your subscriptions a bit easier. You don't have to sign up to subscribe. You can post through the web. This is a pretty big deal, as it opens up list participation to folks who don't want to use email for this purpose. It makes the whole experience more forum-like for those who prefer that. The interface is responsive and mobile-friendly. It uses the widespread "Bootstrap" theme which is a bit generic but pleasing enough. You can search the archives. There are some nice forum-like activity indicators in the web interface and (sure to be controversial) upvote/downvote buttons for posts, though the latter seem to largely be ignored in real-world installations. While setting the software up was difficult (easier if you have prior familiarity with Django), I did not encounter any showstopper bugs. == The bad == The web interface does not degrade gracefully to users without JavaScript: important features just stop working. The list administration tool has some new features, but it has also lost old features. For example, while Mailman 2 lets you easily change per-user moderation from the the "held messages" interface, this is still an open task in Mailman 3. [4] The more modular approach in Mailman 3 means that features don't always play together. For example, you can delete a list, but deleting the archives requires manual execution of an un-official Python code snippet. [5] This modularity also means some defaults are unhelpful. For example, the default emails generated by the software do not link to the web interface, because the web interface is a separate module that may not be installed. == The ugly == The platform is not yet ready for translation, and the interface is in English only. Quoth the project leader in response to whether it is possible to change the UI language: [6] (Hey, I think I know such a platform.) Faithful migration will likely also require some level of custom development. Quoth the docs: [7] == What to do? == It's doubtful that Mailman 3 will magically advance in leaps and bounds over the coming years. Adoption generally tends to drive interest and development, and a WMF decision to upgrade may motivate others to work towards solving longstanding problems like the i18n issue. The Fedora installation appears to show that it's possible to run Mailman 3 at scale already, though I haven't spoken to them about their experiences. I don't believe that the usability advantage Discourse currently enjoys is inherent to web forums -- Mailman 3 shows that there is a development path to make mailing lists more accessible and friendly, as well, even if there is still a lot of work to be done. My main recommendation would be to evaluate the state of play towards a more explicit choice between three outcomes: 1) list discussion is not important enough to warrant a lot of attention; Mailman 2 (which continues to receive updates and fixes) is likely to continue to meet the movement's needs in that regard; 2) list discussion is important enough to warrant an investment in gradually moving lists over and helping to resolve open issues; 3) list discussion is important enough to warrant migration to an alternative system, such as Discourse. Warmly, Erik == Notes == [1] https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/ [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T52864 [3] https://lists.freeculture.org/ [4] https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/issues/127 [5] https://gitlab.com/mailman/hyperkitty/issues/3 [6] https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users@mailman3.org/thread/… [7] http://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/pre-installation-guide.htm7