You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@beam.apache.org by Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com> on 2021/03/10 18:36:17 UTC
User-related questions in dev@ list
Hello all,
A quick question about our mailing lists policy.
Quite often I see that people tend to send the user-related questions to dev@. For example: [1], [2] and many similar ones.
I believe it’s a bad practice since it's mixing up with other dev-related threads and makes it difficult to search for similar questions in the future (since it’s expecting to be asked on user@).
What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases (maybe some experience for other projects)?
Regards,
Alexey
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r4976a36f01284abec84f411c540f4016aa1bc81aed05b8a14aa04b1f%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r75a0c49ebc5f25d979c176845437cc2bc69059cb02bb7db83b2716e6%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com>.
Thanks everybody for your feedback!
I also agree, that dev@ is mostly like a forum for every topics potentially related to Beam improvement (in different ways, not only the code) and I’d ask more developers to take a look on user@ from time to time as well (even if it’s not very active but we still have Slack channels and StackOverflow, btw) and help with user-related questions.
For the user questions sent to dev@ I’d suggest to kindly ask to continue a discussion on user@ list.
Cheers,
Alexey
> On 11 Mar 2021, at 00:08, Valentyn Tymofieiev <va...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > I would say that it is on us to redirect traffic to the correct place if we want to effect a change.
> +1 to this.
>
> I think the clean way to accomplish this is to say: "Let's continue this conversation on user@", add user@ and move dev@ to bcc (to avoid the fork), then (hopefully), answer the thread on user@ in the next message.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 3:04 PM Robert Bradshaw <robertwb@google.com <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
> I am in the same boat: I'm subscribed to both but the dev@ ones are more visible to me. That being said, I do think it's valuable to have segregated discussion (otherwise why have two lists), and "lurkers" on users@ can learn from questions answered there.
>
> I would say that it is on us to redirect traffic to the correct place if we want to effect a change. Forking the conversation is a problem, but enough people have answered this thread (and likely many more have read it) that if we consciously set a convention we should be able to follow it. This could be as simple as responding to such queries as "I am forwarding your email to users@ [and will answer it there]" and not responding to threads that have been resolved as such.
>
> +1 to Kenn's idea about explicitly calling out dev@ as the forum for those interested in contributing to beam. (This can be community/design contributions of course.)
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:21 PM Pablo Estrada <pabloem@google.com <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
> My impression is that Boyuan is right: People may email dev@ because they may feel they're more likely to get a response. I'll confess that I am subscribed to both, but pay more attention to dev : /
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:16 PM Kenneth Knowles <kenn@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> Note on the data: dev@ is much higher volume than user@ right now (maybe 2x?). [1] [2]
>
> I think https://beam.apache.org/community/contact-us/ <https://beam.apache.org/community/contact-us/> has an OK description. I guess we could make it more clear about "Developer and contributor discussions" / "Developer mailing list" to mean that it is about developing Beam itself. But personally, I think it is OK to be ambiguous. For Beam, any user request might be a PTransform we want to add, after all, etc. Of course, my opinion should not be taken too seriously, since I am subscribed to both so they both hit my inbox.
>
> Another practice I have: When something on user@ makes me think of a feature request or a complex issue, I send the thread also to dev@. I think it is OK for users to also make this decision for themselves, at least for now. Maybe we should have this deal: feel free to send your issues to dev@ if you are willing to become a Beam contributor to improve it aka "mail dev@ if you are interested in developing Beam" :-)
>
> Kenn
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?user@beam.apache.org <ht...@beam.apache.org>
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@beam.apache.org <ht...@beam.apache.org>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:04 PM Alexey Romanenko <aromanenko.dev@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> On 10 Mar 2021, at 22:13, Onur Ozer <sametozer13@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the dev list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
>
> Onur,
> Well, I just picked up a random example of one of the latest emails, that, I believe, should be addressed to user@.
> So no worries on this =) and thank you for a good question!
>
>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sniemitz@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very difficult to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and typically just chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an answer there. Having clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would be very useful to better guide people towards the correct list.
>>
>> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this have gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like it fits into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly also see how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as well.
>>
>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
> Steve,
> I think your question is somewhere between these 2 lists =) Since, on the one hand, it’s more about some specific user’s problem, but, on the other hand, it probably requires some internal dev knowledge to answer it. Personally, I’d send it to user@, but it’s a tricky example - so any is fine, imho .
>
> I agree, that we don’t have strict borders and rules to decide where a question should go and sometimes, as an example above, it’s not so obvious, but I think we can improve the description of both lists on web site to make it more clear for new users.
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <altay@google.com <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <aromanenko.dev@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>>
>>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads. One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>
>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>
>>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>>
>>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure about why users pick one list over another.
>>
>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any relationship with project development in any sense (new features/ infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some examples for both of the lists?
>>
>> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review proposed design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your design ideas about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>>
>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Valentyn Tymofieiev <va...@google.com>.
> I would say that it is on us to redirect traffic to the correct place if
we want to effect a change.
+1 to this.
I think the clean way to accomplish this is to say: "Let's continue this
conversation on user@", add user@ and move dev@ to bcc (to avoid the
fork), then (hopefully), answer the thread on user@ in the next message.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 3:04 PM Robert Bradshaw <ro...@google.com> wrote:
> I am in the same boat: I'm subscribed to both but the dev@ ones are more
> visible to me. That being said, I do think it's valuable to have segregated
> discussion (otherwise why have two lists), and "lurkers" on users@ can
> learn from questions answered there.
>
> I would say that it is on us to redirect traffic to the correct place if
> we want to effect a change. Forking the conversation is a problem, but
> enough people have answered this thread (and likely many more have read it)
> that if we consciously set a convention we should be able to follow it.
> This could be as simple as responding to such queries as "I am forwarding
> your email to users@ [and will answer it there]" and not responding to
> threads that have been resolved as such.
>
> +1 to Kenn's idea about explicitly calling out dev@ as the forum for
> those interested in contributing to beam. (This can be community/design
> contributions of course.)
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:21 PM Pablo Estrada <pa...@google.com> wrote:
>
>> My impression is that Boyuan is right: People may email dev@ because
>> they may feel they're more likely to get a response. I'll confess that I am
>> subscribed to both, but pay more attention to dev : /
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:16 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Note on the data: dev@ is much higher volume than user@ right now
>>> (maybe 2x?). [1] [2]
>>>
>>> I think https://beam.apache.org/community/contact-us/ has an OK
>>> description. I guess we could make it more clear about "Developer and
>>> contributor discussions" / "Developer mailing list" to mean that it is
>>> about developing Beam itself. But personally, I think it is OK to be
>>> ambiguous. For Beam, any user request might be a PTransform we want to add,
>>> after all, etc. Of course, my opinion should not be taken too seriously,
>>> since I am subscribed to both so they both hit my inbox.
>>>
>>> Another practice I have: When something on user@ makes me think of a
>>> feature request or a complex issue, I send the thread also to dev@. I
>>> think it is OK for users to also make this decision for themselves, at
>>> least for now. Maybe we should have this deal: feel free to send your
>>> issues to dev@ if you are willing to become a Beam contributor to
>>> improve it aka "mail dev@ if you are interested in developing Beam" :-)
>>>
>>> Kenn
>>>
>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?user@beam.apache.org
>>> [2] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@beam.apache.org
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:04 PM Alexey Romanenko <
>>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10 Mar 2021, at 22:13, Onur Ozer <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the
>>>> dev list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Onur,
>>>> Well, I just picked up a random example of one of the latest emails,
>>>> that, I believe, should be addressed to user@.
>>>> So no worries on this =) and thank you for a good question!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sn...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very
>>>>> difficult to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and
>>>>> typically just chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an
>>>>> answer there. Having clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would
>>>>> be very useful to better guide people towards the correct list.
>>>>>
>>>>> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this
>>>>> have gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like
>>>>> it fits into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly
>>>>> also see how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as
>>>>> well.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Steve,
>>>> I think your question is somewhere between these 2 lists =) Since, on
>>>> the one hand, it’s more about some specific user’s problem, but, on the
>>>> other hand, it probably requires some internal dev knowledge to answer it.
>>>> Personally, I’d send it to user@, but it’s a tricky example - so any
>>>> is fine, imho .
>>>>
>>>> I agree, that we don’t have strict borders and rules to decide where a
>>>> question should go and sometimes, as an example above, it’s not so obvious,
>>>> but I think we can improve the description of both lists on web site to
>>>> make it more clear for new users.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <
>>>>>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such
>>>>>>>> emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from
>>>>>>>> copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several
>>>>>>>> times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued
>>>>>>>> in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked
>>>>>>> threads. One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to
>>>>>>> ask on user@ list next time and still answer the question in the
>>>>>>> original thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases
>>>>>>>> (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of
>>>>>>> user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a
>>>>>>> good amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am
>>>>>>> not sure about why users pick one list over another.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list
>>>>>>> is _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
>>>>>>> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
>>>>>>> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
>>>>>>> examples for both of the lists?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review
>>>>>> proposed design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your
>>>>>> design ideas about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Robert Bradshaw <ro...@google.com>.
I am in the same boat: I'm subscribed to both but the dev@ ones are more
visible to me. That being said, I do think it's valuable to have segregated
discussion (otherwise why have two lists), and "lurkers" on users@ can
learn from questions answered there.
I would say that it is on us to redirect traffic to the correct place if we
want to effect a change. Forking the conversation is a problem, but enough
people have answered this thread (and likely many more have read it) that
if we consciously set a convention we should be able to follow it. This
could be as simple as responding to such queries as "I am forwarding your
email to users@ [and will answer it there]" and not responding to threads
that have been resolved as such.
+1 to Kenn's idea about explicitly calling out dev@ as the forum for those
interested in contributing to beam. (This can be community/design
contributions of course.)
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:21 PM Pablo Estrada <pa...@google.com> wrote:
> My impression is that Boyuan is right: People may email dev@ because they
> may feel they're more likely to get a response. I'll confess that I am
> subscribed to both, but pay more attention to dev : /
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:16 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Note on the data: dev@ is much higher volume than user@ right now (maybe
>> 2x?). [1] [2]
>>
>> I think https://beam.apache.org/community/contact-us/ has an OK
>> description. I guess we could make it more clear about "Developer and
>> contributor discussions" / "Developer mailing list" to mean that it is
>> about developing Beam itself. But personally, I think it is OK to be
>> ambiguous. For Beam, any user request might be a PTransform we want to add,
>> after all, etc. Of course, my opinion should not be taken too seriously,
>> since I am subscribed to both so they both hit my inbox.
>>
>> Another practice I have: When something on user@ makes me think of a
>> feature request or a complex issue, I send the thread also to dev@. I
>> think it is OK for users to also make this decision for themselves, at
>> least for now. Maybe we should have this deal: feel free to send your
>> issues to dev@ if you are willing to become a Beam contributor to
>> improve it aka "mail dev@ if you are interested in developing Beam" :-)
>>
>> Kenn
>>
>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?user@beam.apache.org
>> [2] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@beam.apache.org
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:04 PM Alexey Romanenko <
>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 10 Mar 2021, at 22:13, Onur Ozer <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the dev
>>> list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
>>>
>>>
>>> Onur,
>>> Well, I just picked up a random example of one of the latest emails,
>>> that, I believe, should be addressed to user@.
>>> So no worries on this =) and thank you for a good question!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sn...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very
>>>> difficult to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and
>>>> typically just chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an
>>>> answer there. Having clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would
>>>> be very useful to better guide people towards the correct list.
>>>>
>>>> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this
>>>> have gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like
>>>> it fits into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly
>>>> also see how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as
>>>> well.
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>> I think your question is somewhere between these 2 lists =) Since, on
>>> the one hand, it’s more about some specific user’s problem, but, on the
>>> other hand, it probably requires some internal dev knowledge to answer it.
>>> Personally, I’d send it to user@, but it’s a tricky example - so any is
>>> fine, imho .
>>>
>>> I agree, that we don’t have strict borders and rules to decide where a
>>> question should go and sometimes, as an example above, it’s not so obvious,
>>> but I think we can improve the description of both lists on web site to
>>> make it more clear for new users.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <
>>>>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such
>>>>>>> emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from
>>>>>>> copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several
>>>>>>> times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued
>>>>>>> in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked
>>>>>> threads. One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to
>>>>>> ask on user@ list next time and still answer the question in the
>>>>>> original thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases
>>>>>>> (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of
>>>>>> user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a
>>>>>> good amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am
>>>>>> not sure about why users pick one list over another.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list
>>>>>> is _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
>>>>>> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
>>>>>> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
>>>>>> examples for both of the lists?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review
>>>>> proposed design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your
>>>>> design ideas about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Pablo Estrada <pa...@google.com>.
My impression is that Boyuan is right: People may email dev@ because they
may feel they're more likely to get a response. I'll confess that I am
subscribed to both, but pay more attention to dev : /
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:16 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> Note on the data: dev@ is much higher volume than user@ right now (maybe
> 2x?). [1] [2]
>
> I think https://beam.apache.org/community/contact-us/ has an OK
> description. I guess we could make it more clear about "Developer and
> contributor discussions" / "Developer mailing list" to mean that it is
> about developing Beam itself. But personally, I think it is OK to be
> ambiguous. For Beam, any user request might be a PTransform we want to add,
> after all, etc. Of course, my opinion should not be taken too seriously,
> since I am subscribed to both so they both hit my inbox.
>
> Another practice I have: When something on user@ makes me think of a
> feature request or a complex issue, I send the thread also to dev@. I
> think it is OK for users to also make this decision for themselves, at
> least for now. Maybe we should have this deal: feel free to send your
> issues to dev@ if you are willing to become a Beam contributor to improve
> it aka "mail dev@ if you are interested in developing Beam" :-)
>
> Kenn
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?user@beam.apache.org
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@beam.apache.org
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:04 PM Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 10 Mar 2021, at 22:13, Onur Ozer <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the dev
>> list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
>>
>>
>> Onur,
>> Well, I just picked up a random example of one of the latest emails,
>> that, I believe, should be addressed to user@.
>> So no worries on this =) and thank you for a good question!
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sn...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very
>>> difficult to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and
>>> typically just chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an answer
>>> there. Having clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would be
>>> very useful to better guide people towards the correct list.
>>>
>>> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this have
>>> gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like it fits
>>> into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly also see
>>> how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as well.
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
>>>
>>
>> Steve,
>> I think your question is somewhere between these 2 lists =) Since, on the
>> one hand, it’s more about some specific user’s problem, but, on the other
>> hand, it probably requires some internal dev knowledge to answer it.
>> Personally, I’d send it to user@, but it’s a tricky example - so any is
>> fine, imho .
>>
>> I agree, that we don’t have strict borders and rules to decide where a
>> question should go and sometimes, as an example above, it’s not so obvious,
>> but I think we can improve the description of both lists on web site to
>> make it more clear for new users.
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <
>>>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such
>>>>>> emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from
>>>>>> copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several
>>>>>> times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued
>>>>>> in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked
>>>>> threads. One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to
>>>>> ask on user@ list next time and still answer the question in the
>>>>> original thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases
>>>>>> (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of
>>>>> user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good
>>>>> amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not
>>>>> sure about why users pick one list over another.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list
>>>>> is _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
>>>>> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
>>>>> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
>>>>> examples for both of the lists?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review
>>>> proposed design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your
>>>> design ideas about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
Note on the data: dev@ is much higher volume than user@ right now (maybe
2x?). [1] [2]
I think https://beam.apache.org/community/contact-us/ has an OK
description. I guess we could make it more clear about "Developer and
contributor discussions" / "Developer mailing list" to mean that it is
about developing Beam itself. But personally, I think it is OK to be
ambiguous. For Beam, any user request might be a PTransform we want to add,
after all, etc. Of course, my opinion should not be taken too seriously,
since I am subscribed to both so they both hit my inbox.
Another practice I have: When something on user@ makes me think of a
feature request or a complex issue, I send the thread also to dev@. I think
it is OK for users to also make this decision for themselves, at least for
now. Maybe we should have this deal: feel free to send your issues to dev@
if you are willing to become a Beam contributor to improve it aka "mail dev@
if you are interested in developing Beam" :-)
Kenn
[1] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?user@beam.apache.org
[2] https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@beam.apache.org
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:04 PM Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> On 10 Mar 2021, at 22:13, Onur Ozer <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the dev
> list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
>
>
> Onur,
> Well, I just picked up a random example of one of the latest emails, that,
> I believe, should be addressed to user@.
> So no worries on this =) and thank you for a good question!
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very difficult
>> to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and typically just
>> chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an answer there. Having
>> clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would be very useful to
>> better guide people towards the correct list.
>>
>> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this have
>> gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like it fits
>> into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly also see
>> how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as well.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
>>
>
> Steve,
> I think your question is somewhere between these 2 lists =) Since, on the
> one hand, it’s more about some specific user’s problem, but, on the other
> hand, it probably requires some internal dev knowledge to answer it.
> Personally, I’d send it to user@, but it’s a tricky example - so any is
> fine, imho .
>
> I agree, that we don’t have strict borders and rules to decide where a
> question should go and sometimes, as an example above, it’s not so obvious,
> but I think we can improve the description of both lists on web site to
> make it more clear for new users.
>
>
>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <
>>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such
>>>>> emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from
>>>>> copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several
>>>>> times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued
>>>>> in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads.
>>>> One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on
>>>> user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original
>>>> thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>>>
>>>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases
>>>>> (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of
>>>> user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good
>>>> amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure
>>>> about why users pick one list over another.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is
>>>> _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
>>>> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
>>>> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
>>>> examples for both of the lists?
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review
>>> proposed design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your
>>> design ideas about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com>.
> On 10 Mar 2021, at 22:13, Onur Ozer <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the dev list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
Onur,
Well, I just picked up a random example of one of the latest emails, that, I believe, should be addressed to user@.
So no worries on this =) and thank you for a good question!
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sniemitz@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very difficult to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and typically just chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an answer there. Having clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would be very useful to better guide people towards the correct list.
>
> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this have gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like it fits into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly also see how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as well.
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E>
Steve,
I think your question is somewhere between these 2 lists =) Since, on the one hand, it’s more about some specific user’s problem, but, on the other hand, it probably requires some internal dev knowledge to answer it. Personally, I’d send it to user@, but it’s a tricky example - so any is fine, imho .
I agree, that we don’t have strict borders and rules to decide where a question should go and sometimes, as an example above, it’s not so obvious, but I think we can improve the description of both lists on web site to make it more clear for new users.
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <altay@google.com <ma...@google.com>> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <aromanenko.dev@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>
>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads. One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>
> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>
>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>
>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure about why users pick one list over another.
>
> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any relationship with project development in any sense (new features/ infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some examples for both of the lists?
>
> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review proposed design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your design ideas about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Boyuan Zhang <bo...@google.com>.
I subscribed to both user@ and dev@. It seems to me that we have more
active folks who have knowledge to offer help on the dev@ than the user@.
It's always good to have dev@ and user@ for different usages as long as dev@
and user@ are almost equivalent helpful for dev/users to look for help.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 1:14 PM Onur Ozer <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the dev
> list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very difficult
>> to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and typically just
>> chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an answer there. Having
>> clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would be very useful to
>> better guide people towards the correct list.
>>
>> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this have
>> gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like it fits
>> into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly also see
>> how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as well.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <
>>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such
>>>>> emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from
>>>>> copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several
>>>>> times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued
>>>>> in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads.
>>>> One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on
>>>> user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original
>>>> thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>>>
>>>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases
>>>>> (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of
>>>> user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good
>>>> amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure
>>>> about why users pick one list over another.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is
>>>> _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
>>>> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
>>>> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
>>>> examples for both of the lists?
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review
>>> proposed design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your
>>> design ideas about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Onur Ozer <sa...@gmail.com>.
One of the sample mails belongs to me, sorry for that. I thought the dev
list was a better place. Will ask similar to the other list as well.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:13 PM Steve Niemitz <sn...@apache.org> wrote:
> As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very difficult
> to figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and typically just
> chose dev@ because it seems more likely to get an answer there. Having
> clearer guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would be very useful to
> better guide people towards the correct list.
>
> An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this have
> gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like it fits
> into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly also see
> how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as well.
>
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <
>> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such
>>>> emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from
>>>> copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several
>>>> times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued
>>>> in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>>
>>>
>>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads.
>>> One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on
>>> user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original
>>> thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>>
>>>
>>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>>
>>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases
>>>> (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of user@?
>>> Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good amount of
>>> activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure about why
>>> users pick one list over another.
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is
>>> _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
>>> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
>>> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
>>> examples for both of the lists?
>>>
>>
>> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review proposed
>> design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your design ideas
>> about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>>
>>
>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Steve Niemitz <sn...@apache.org>.
As a frequent emailer of dev@, I'll admit that it's often very difficult to
figure out if I should be emailing user@ or dev@, and typically just chose
dev@ because it seems more likely to get an answer there. Having clearer
guidelines around what is a "dev" topic would be very useful to better
guide people towards the correct list.
An example here was my recent email about schemas. [1] Should this have
gone to users@? I count myself as a "developer" so I feel like it fits
into "developer and contributor discussions", but I can certainly also see
how it would fit into "general discussions" for users@ as well.
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r881ab4d0ccbc7dc2e8c478f9b68b18b313f3740b419fdf7e91a17a83%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:52 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <
> aromanenko.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such emails?
>>> Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from copy) and ask
>>> politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several times but
>>> sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued in two
>>> different lists which is even worse, imho.
>>
>>
>> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads.
>> One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on
>> user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original
>> thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>>
>>
>> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>>
>> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases
>>> (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>>
>>
>> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of user@?
>> Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good amount of
>> activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure about why
>> users pick one list over another.
>>
>>
>> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is
>> _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
>> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
>> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
>> examples for both of the lists?
>>
>
> +1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review proposed
> design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your design ideas
> about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
>
>
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com>.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:16 AM Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such emails?
>> Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from copy) and ask
>> politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several times but
>> sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued in two
>> different lists which is even worse, imho.
>
>
> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads.
> One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on
> user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original
> thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>
>
> Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
>
> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases (maybe
>> some experience for other projects)?
>
>
> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of user@?
> Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good amount of
> activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure about why
> users pick one list over another.
>
>
> Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is
> _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any
> relationship with project development in any sense (new features/
> infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some
> examples for both of the lists?
>
+1 this makes sense to me. And reading the website again "review proposed
design ideas on dev@" might imply that you can bring your design ideas
about your own use cases/issues to the dev list.
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com>.
> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such emails? Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from copy) and ask politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several times but sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued in two different lists which is even worse, imho.
>
> I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads. One suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on user@ list next time and still answer the question in the original thread. Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
Agree with asking and not to fork, since it usually won’t help.
> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases (maybe some experience for other projects)?
>
> I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of user@? Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good amount of activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure about why users pick one list over another.
Maybe we need to make it even more clear on web page that dev@ list is _only_ for dev-related questions, that are supposed to have any relationship with project development in any sense (new features/ infrastructure/ bugs/ testing/ documentation/ etc) and provide some examples for both of the lists?
Re: User-related questions in dev@ list
Posted by Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com>.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:36 AM Alexey Romanenko <ar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> A quick question about our mailing lists policy.
>
> Quite often I see that people tend to send the user-related questions to
> dev@. For example: [1], [2] and many similar ones.
>
> I believe it’s a bad practice since it's mixing up with other dev-related
> threads and makes it difficult to search for similar questions in the
> future (since it’s expecting to be asked on user@).
>
I agree with you.
>
> What do you think should be the right behaviour for managing such emails?
> Forward this email to user@ (and remove dev@ address from copy) and ask
> politely to continue a discussion there? I tried it several times but
> sometimes it happened that discussion was "forked” and continued in two
> different lists which is even worse, imho.
I like your proposal but I do share the same concern of forked threads. One
suggestion, instead of forking the thread we can ask users to ask on user@
list next time and still answer the question in the original thread.
Hopefully that can reinforce good habits over time.
>
>
> Anything else? What do you believe should work better in such cases (maybe
> some experience for other projects)?
I wonder if there is a reason for people to ask on dev@ instead of user@?
Web site instructions look pretty clear to me. There is a good amount of
activity and engagement on user@ list as well. I am not sure about why
users pick one list over another.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alexey
>
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r4976a36f01284abec84f411c540f4016aa1bc81aed05b8a14aa04b1f%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> [2]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r75a0c49ebc5f25d979c176845437cc2bc69059cb02bb7db83b2716e6%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E