You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@weex.apache.org by Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com> on 2017/11/06 21:34:28 UTC
How about creating a project channel?
Hi all!
For lots of people having a synchronous channel to talk about the project,
ask quick questions, etc. is a very important piece of building a community
around a framework. I happen to be one of those people :)
As an apache incubated project, I'd guess a proprietary platform like Slack
is out of question. How about a freenode irc channel? Or an official gitter
channel?
Months ago I created the unofficial gitter channel
https://gitter.im/weex-en/Lobby. It is not very active, but people show up
from time to time to ask questions. I think it would be a good idea to have
an official weex channel.
Thanks,
Tiago
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Jonathan Dong <jo...@outlook.com>.
Agree.
I suppose that more talks should happen in dev@ mail list to follow the Apache Way, not only creating Jira issues.
There’s a historical reason for Weex not adopting mail list quite well for now. Before incubated in Apache, Weex is acknowledged by its community (especially in China) after its open source announcement, and some discussion channels like QQ / WeChat / DingDing have already been established and gathered many Weex developers & users since then. I believe Weex committers try to steer discussions to mail list but perhaps it takes time to inform every Weex developer to aware this change and switch their discussions language from Chinese to English. Anyway, I believe committers will try their best to keep the discussions transparent and public, and people will tend to discuss in dev@ as soon as they feel the discussion is continuously and responsive.
Cheers,
Jonathan Dong
On 1 Dec 2017, 12:23 AM +0800, Adam Feng , wrote:
Hi, Niclas
It's good to see you still here. We've learnt so much from you about Apache Way，it is also true that we still need guidance.
Last month we had a discussion[1] on roadmap for community building and we deviced to improve our workflow and documentation first. We have finished the documents for "How to Contribute"[2] and "Development Process"[3].
Generally, Weex uses JIRA Issue to track all types of code changes and not just bug fixes, and uses Github pull requests to manage the review and merge of specific code changes. That is, JIRAs are used to describe what should be fixed or changed, and high-level approaches, and pull requests describe how to implement that change in the project’s source code.
Be sure to search the issues before creating new ones to avoid duplication. If your change may be controversial, you may want to create a discussion in the weex-dev mailing list.
Every pull request should correspond to a issue in JIRA.
We want to track all types of code changes in JIRA issues to make our development process more openness and transparency. Contributors are not simply creating issues and commiting code, they will have discussions in pull requests, which will be sent to the mailing list([4] is a good example).
And for dev@ mailing list, I just reviewed all the mails(excluding JIRA issues) in Oct. and Nov. [5]， actually more discussions were made than that in Aug. and Sep.. Some of the discussions are about important decisions such as whether to use Github issues, how to develop plugins conveniently, how to replace Facebook/Yoga, whether to create a project channel, etc. More and more non-alibaba and non-Chinese guys were participating in the discussions.
Still and all, this is not enough, as you said, some discussions are still done elsewhere, openness and diversity are important to Weex, we should continue our work in open communication and decision making.
Looking forward to your insight.
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/%3C3dbd5926-efda-4d39-866f-9995602ba009%40Spark%3E[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex-site/blob/master/source/contributing.md[3] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex-site/blob/master/source/development-process.md[4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex/pull/918#pullrequestreview-80162812[5]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/date
Thanks.Adam Feng
On 29 Nov 2017, 1:11 PM +0800, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>, wrote:
IMHO,
Weex is drifting away from the Apache Way at the moment. Less and less
discussion is seen in dev@, and simply Jira issues pop up from seemingly no
where, which is an indicator that discussions are done elsewhere. I simply
doubt that everyone is working in isolation and creating/commenting Jiras
and nothing else.
Comments?
Niclas
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I understand your perspective and accept your position. The mail list must
be the official channel, and everything important should go through there.
Maybe later we can go back to this idea. I still think that a Slack or
Gitter channel, if properly supervised, would even help the mailing list.
For example, I started writing in the mailing list because Hanks pushed me
to do so in the gitter channel. The problem with unofficial channels is
that they are not listed in the official website...
Cheers!
Tiago
On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 at 01:54 Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Tiago
Thanks for you suggestion.
As Raphael said, chat is only the second communications tool at ASF, the
problem for us before was chatting too much(in some Chinese chat tools),
now we should first make our mailing list active enough.
I think unofficial chat channels are fine, but I suggest bring all the
developers to mailing list first and not create any official channel for
now.
Thanks.
Adam Feng
On 7 Nov 2017, 5:52 AM +0800, wrote:
Hi Tiago
No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects using
Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the
second
communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions, etc.
But I like chat too in some case.
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
One more thing;
https://lists.apache.org is a much easier to use mail archive than
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox
<http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/%3C3dbd5926-efda-4d39-866f-9995602ba009%40Spark%3E[2]>
Try it out...
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> Adam,
> it is good to see that there has been progress, but I am hesitant to say
> that it is enough of progress.
>
> A big chunk of ideas in most projects are "bad ideas" (for whatever
> reason) and tossed out. Since no "New Features" in Jira are resolved in any
> dismissive way, it means that "bad ideas" are filtered out elsewhere, and
> the "DNA of the project" is not spreading.
>
> Jonathan,
> it is very easy to stop discussions on alternative channels, if you want
> to. "people will tend to discuss in dev@ as soon as they feel the
> discussion is continuously and responsive." --> this is just silly. If you
> want to discuss the food you ate at lunch, and that a new idea was formed
> because of something on the plate, then that is fine. dev@ is not
> "formal" in any corporate sense and should be the default place where to
> express anything relevant to the people in the community, even if it is
> "Hey, everyone in Hangzhou, let's go for dinner Thursday night at ..."
>
> Ideas that are bad, are often criticized and sometimes leading to long
> threads, and that is healthy. Ideas that are good are often discussed a lot
> to see if there is somewhat better way to do it, that is healthy. Then
> there are ideas in the middle, rather indifferent to most people, and no
> one has something valuable to add or remove, that is fine too. And many of
> these discussions never becomes anything tangible, as were discussed. In
> some projects, more things are discussed than done... And there is value in
> that too;
>
> * People getting to know each other better, socially, culturally and
> technically,
> * New people gets insights into the project's details that is otherwise
> hard to learn,
> * Practice your English and learn to be confident but not arrogant.
> * Ideas give birth to new ideas, which could become features or even
> complete new projects.
>
> The essence of the Apache Way is this exchange of ideas, sharing each
> others perspective and knowledge, creating a growth bed for innovation and
> friendships.
>
>
> Cheers
> Niclas
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:21 AM, Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Niclas
>>
>> It's good to see you still here. We've learnt so much from you about
>> Apache Way，it is also true that we still need guidance.
>> Last month we had a discussion[1] on roadmap for community building and
>> we deviced to improve our workflow and documentation first. We have
>> finished the documents for "How to Contribute"[2] and "Development
>> Process"[3].
>> > Generally, Weex uses JIRA Issue to track all types of code changes and
>> not just bug fixes, and uses Github pull requests to manage the review and
>> merge of specific code changes. That is, JIRAs are used to describe what
>> should be fixed or changed, and high-level approaches, and pull requests
>> describe how to implement that change in the project’s source code.
>> > Be sure to search the issues before creating new ones to avoid
>> duplication. If your change may be controversial, you may want to create a
>> discussion in the weex-dev mailing list.
>> > Every pull request should correspond to a issue in JIRA.
>> We want to track all types of code changes in JIRA issues to make our
>> development process more openness and transparency. Contributors are not
>> simply creating issues and commiting code, they will have discussions in
>> pull requests, which will be sent to the mailing list([4] is a good
>> example).
>> And for dev@ mailing list, I just reviewed all the mails(excluding JIRA
>> issues) in Oct. and Nov. [5]， actually more discussions were made than that
>> in Aug. and Sep.. Some of the discussions are about important decisions
>> such as whether to use Github issues, how to develop plugins conveniently,
>> how to replace Facebook/Yoga, whether to create a project channel, etc.
>> More and more non-alibaba and non-Chinese guys were participating in the
>> discussions.
>> Still and all, this is not enough, as you said, some discussions are
>> still done elsewhere, openness and diversity are important to Weex, we
>> should continue our work in open communication and decision making.
>> Looking forward to your insight.
>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/
>> 201710.mbox/%3C3dbd5926-efda-4d39-866f-9995602ba009%40Spark%3E[2]
>> <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/%3C3dbd5926-efda-4d39-866f-9995602ba009%40Spark%3E%5B2%5D>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex-site/blob/master/
>> source/contributing.md[3] https://github.com/apache/incu
>> bator-weex-site/blob/master/source/development-process.md[4]
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex/pull/918#pullreques
>> treview-80162812[5]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_
>> mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/date
>>
>> Thanks.Adam Feng
>>
>> On 29 Nov 2017, 1:11 PM +0800, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>,
>> wrote:
>> > IMHO,
>> > Weex is drifting away from the Apache Way at the moment. Less and less
>> > discussion is seen in dev@, and simply Jira issues pop up from
>> seemingly no
>> > where, which is an indicator that discussions are done elsewhere. I
>> simply
>> > doubt that everyone is working in isolation and creating/commenting
>> Jiras
>> > and nothing else.
>> >
>> > Comments?
>> >
>> > Niclas
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I understand your perspective and accept your position. The mail list
>> must
>> > > be the official channel, and everything important should go through
>> there.
>> > >
>> > > Maybe later we can go back to this idea. I still think that a Slack or
>> > > Gitter channel, if properly supervised, would even help the mailing
>> list.
>> > > For example, I started writing in the mailing list because Hanks
>> pushed me
>> > > to do so in the gitter channel. The problem with unofficial channels
>> is
>> > > that they are not listed in the official website...
>> > >
>> > > Cheers!
>> > > Tiago
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 at 01:54 Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi Tiago
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for you suggestion.
>> > > >
>> > > > As Raphael said, chat is only the second communications tool at
>> ASF, the
>> > > > problem for us before was chatting too much(in some Chinese chat
>> tools),
>> > > > now we should first make our mailing list active enough.
>> > > >
>> > > > I think unofficial chat channels are fine, but I suggest bring all
>> the
>> > > > developers to mailing list first and not create any official
>> channel for
>> > > > now.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks.
>> > > > Adam Feng
>> > > >
>> > > > On 7 Nov 2017, 5:52 AM +0800, wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hi Tiago
>> > > > >
>> > > > > No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
>> > > > > discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects
>> using
>> > > > > Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the
>> > > second
>> > > > > communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions,
>> etc.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > But I like chat too in some case.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
>> > http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
Adam,
it is good to see that there has been progress, but I am hesitant to say
that it is enough of progress.
A big chunk of ideas in most projects are "bad ideas" (for whatever reason)
and tossed out. Since no "New Features" in Jira are resolved in any
dismissive way, it means that "bad ideas" are filtered out elsewhere, and
the "DNA of the project" is not spreading.
Jonathan,
it is very easy to stop discussions on alternative channels, if you want
to. "people will tend to discuss in dev@ as soon as they feel the
discussion is continuously and responsive." --> this is just silly. If you
want to discuss the food you ate at lunch, and that a new idea was formed
because of something on the plate, then that is fine. dev@ is not "formal"
in any corporate sense and should be the default place where to express
anything relevant to the people in the community, even if it is "Hey,
everyone in Hangzhou, let's go for dinner Thursday night at ..."
Ideas that are bad, are often criticized and sometimes leading to long
threads, and that is healthy. Ideas that are good are often discussed a lot
to see if there is somewhat better way to do it, that is healthy. Then
there are ideas in the middle, rather indifferent to most people, and no
one has something valuable to add or remove, that is fine too. And many of
these discussions never becomes anything tangible, as were discussed. In
some projects, more things are discussed than done... And there is value in
that too;
* People getting to know each other better, socially, culturally and
technically,
* New people gets insights into the project's details that is otherwise
hard to learn,
* Practice your English and learn to be confident but not arrogant.
* Ideas give birth to new ideas, which could become features or even
complete new projects.
The essence of the Apache Way is this exchange of ideas, sharing each
others perspective and knowledge, creating a growth bed for innovation and
friendships.
Cheers
Niclas
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:21 AM, Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Niclas
>
> It's good to see you still here. We've learnt so much from you about
> Apache Way，it is also true that we still need guidance.
> Last month we had a discussion[1] on roadmap for community building and we
> deviced to improve our workflow and documentation first. We have finished
> the documents for "How to Contribute"[2] and "Development Process"[3].
> > Generally, Weex uses JIRA Issue to track all types of code changes and
> not just bug fixes, and uses Github pull requests to manage the review and
> merge of specific code changes. That is, JIRAs are used to describe what
> should be fixed or changed, and high-level approaches, and pull requests
> describe how to implement that change in the project’s source code.
> > Be sure to search the issues before creating new ones to avoid
> duplication. If your change may be controversial, you may want to create a
> discussion in the weex-dev mailing list.
> > Every pull request should correspond to a issue in JIRA.
> We want to track all types of code changes in JIRA issues to make our
> development process more openness and transparency. Contributors are not
> simply creating issues and commiting code, they will have discussions in
> pull requests, which will be sent to the mailing list([4] is a good
> example).
> And for dev@ mailing list, I just reviewed all the mails(excluding JIRA
> issues) in Oct. and Nov. [5]， actually more discussions were made than that
> in Aug. and Sep.. Some of the discussions are about important decisions
> such as whether to use Github issues, how to develop plugins conveniently,
> how to replace Facebook/Yoga, whether to create a project channel, etc.
> More and more non-alibaba and non-Chinese guys were participating in the
> discussions.
> Still and all, this is not enough, as you said, some discussions are still
> done elsewhere, openness and diversity are important to Weex, we should
> continue our work in open communication and decision making.
> Looking forward to your insight.
> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-
> dev/201710.mbox/%3C3dbd5926-efda-4d39-866f-9995602ba009%40Spark%3E[2]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex-site/blob/
> master/source/contributing.md[3] https://github.com/apache/
> incubator-weex-site/blob/master/source/development-process.md[4]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex/pull/918#
> pullrequestreview-80162812[5]http://mail-archives.apache.
> org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/date
>
> Thanks.Adam Feng
>
> On 29 Nov 2017, 1:11 PM +0800, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>, wrote:
> > IMHO,
> > Weex is drifting away from the Apache Way at the moment. Less and less
> > discussion is seen in dev@, and simply Jira issues pop up from
> seemingly no
> > where, which is an indicator that discussions are done elsewhere. I
> simply
> > doubt that everyone is working in isolation and creating/commenting Jiras
> > and nothing else.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > Niclas
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I understand your perspective and accept your position. The mail list
> must
> > > be the official channel, and everything important should go through
> there.
> > >
> > > Maybe later we can go back to this idea. I still think that a Slack or
> > > Gitter channel, if properly supervised, would even help the mailing
> list.
> > > For example, I started writing in the mailing list because Hanks
> pushed me
> > > to do so in the gitter channel. The problem with unofficial channels is
> > > that they are not listed in the official website...
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > > Tiago
> > >
> > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 at 01:54 Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tiago
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for you suggestion.
> > > >
> > > > As Raphael said, chat is only the second communications tool at ASF,
> the
> > > > problem for us before was chatting too much(in some Chinese chat
> tools),
> > > > now we should first make our mailing list active enough.
> > > >
> > > > I think unofficial chat channels are fine, but I suggest bring all
> the
> > > > developers to mailing list first and not create any official channel
> for
> > > > now.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > > Adam Feng
> > > >
> > > > On 7 Nov 2017, 5:52 AM +0800, wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Tiago
> > > > >
> > > > > No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
> > > > > discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects
> using
> > > > > Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the
> > > second
> > > > > communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > But I like chat too in some case.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> > http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Niclas
It's good to see you still here. We've learnt so much from you about Apache Way，it is also true that we still need guidance.
Last month we had a discussion[1] on roadmap for community building and we deviced to improve our workflow and documentation first. We have finished the documents for "How to Contribute"[2] and "Development Process"[3].
> Generally, Weex uses JIRA Issue to track all types of code changes and not just bug fixes, and uses Github pull requests to manage the review and merge of specific code changes. That is, JIRAs are used to describe what should be fixed or changed, and high-level approaches, and pull requests describe how to implement that change in the project’s source code.
> Be sure to search the issues before creating new ones to avoid duplication. If your change may be controversial, you may want to create a discussion in the weex-dev mailing list.
> Every pull request should correspond to a issue in JIRA.
We want to track all types of code changes in JIRA issues to make our development process more openness and transparency. Contributors are not simply creating issues and commiting code, they will have discussions in pull requests, which will be sent to the mailing list([4] is a good example).
And for dev@ mailing list, I just reviewed all the mails(excluding JIRA issues) in Oct. and Nov. [5]， actually more discussions were made than that in Aug. and Sep.. Some of the discussions are about important decisions such as whether to use Github issues, how to develop plugins conveniently, how to replace Facebook/Yoga, whether to create a project channel, etc. More and more non-alibaba and non-Chinese guys were participating in the discussions.
Still and all, this is not enough, as you said, some discussions are still done elsewhere, openness and diversity are important to Weex, we should continue our work in open communication and decision making.
Looking forward to your insight.
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/%3C3dbd5926-efda-4d39-866f-9995602ba009%40Spark%3E[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex-site/blob/master/source/contributing.md[3] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex-site/blob/master/source/development-process.md[4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex/pull/918#pullrequestreview-80162812[5]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-weex-dev/201710.mbox/date
Thanks.Adam Feng
On 29 Nov 2017, 1:11 PM +0800, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>, wrote:
> IMHO,
> Weex is drifting away from the Apache Way at the moment. Less and less
> discussion is seen in dev@, and simply Jira issues pop up from seemingly no
> where, which is an indicator that discussions are done elsewhere. I simply
> doubt that everyone is working in isolation and creating/commenting Jiras
> and nothing else.
>
> Comments?
>
> Niclas
>
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I understand your perspective and accept your position. The mail list must
> > be the official channel, and everything important should go through there.
> >
> > Maybe later we can go back to this idea. I still think that a Slack or
> > Gitter channel, if properly supervised, would even help the mailing list.
> > For example, I started writing in the mailing list because Hanks pushed me
> > to do so in the gitter channel. The problem with unofficial channels is
> > that they are not listed in the official website...
> >
> > Cheers!
> > Tiago
> >
> > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 at 01:54 Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Tiago
> > >
> > > Thanks for you suggestion.
> > >
> > > As Raphael said, chat is only the second communications tool at ASF, the
> > > problem for us before was chatting too much(in some Chinese chat tools),
> > > now we should first make our mailing list active enough.
> > >
> > > I think unofficial chat channels are fine, but I suggest bring all the
> > > developers to mailing list first and not create any official channel for
> > > now.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > > Adam Feng
> > >
> > > On 7 Nov 2017, 5:52 AM +0800, wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tiago
> > > >
> > > > No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
> > > > discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects using
> > > > Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the
> > second
> > > > communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions, etc.
> > > >
> > > > But I like chat too in some case.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
IMHO,
Weex is drifting away from the Apache Way at the moment. Less and less
discussion is seen in dev@, and simply Jira issues pop up from seemingly no
where, which is an indicator that discussions are done elsewhere. I simply
doubt that everyone is working in isolation and creating/commenting Jiras
and nothing else.
Comments?
Niclas
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I understand your perspective and accept your position. The mail list must
> be the official channel, and everything important should go through there.
>
> Maybe later we can go back to this idea. I still think that a Slack or
> Gitter channel, if properly supervised, would even help the mailing list.
> For example, I started writing in the mailing list because Hanks pushed me
> to do so in the gitter channel. The problem with unofficial channels is
> that they are not listed in the official website...
>
> Cheers!
> Tiago
>
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 at 01:54 Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tiago
> >
> > Thanks for you suggestion.
> >
> > As Raphael said, chat is only the second communications tool at ASF, the
> > problem for us before was chatting too much(in some Chinese chat tools),
> > now we should first make our mailing list active enough.
> >
> > I think unofficial chat channels are fine, but I suggest bring all the
> > developers to mailing list first and not create any official channel for
> > now.
> >
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Adam Feng
> >
> > On 7 Nov 2017, 5:52 AM +0800, wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Tiago
> > >
> > > No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
> > > discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects using
> > > Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the
> second
> > > communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions, etc.
> > >
> > > But I like chat too in some case.
> >
>
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I understand your perspective and accept your position. The mail list must
be the official channel, and everything important should go through there.
Maybe later we can go back to this idea. I still think that a Slack or
Gitter channel, if properly supervised, would even help the mailing list.
For example, I started writing in the mailing list because Hanks pushed me
to do so in the gitter channel. The problem with unofficial channels is
that they are not listed in the official website...
Cheers!
Tiago
On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 at 01:54 Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tiago
>
> Thanks for you suggestion.
>
> As Raphael said, chat is only the second communications tool at ASF, the
> problem for us before was chatting too much(in some Chinese chat tools),
> now we should first make our mailing list active enough.
>
> I think unofficial chat channels are fine, but I suggest bring all the
> developers to mailing list first and not create any official channel for
> now.
>
>
> Thanks.
> Adam Feng
>
> On 7 Nov 2017, 5:52 AM +0800, wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tiago
> >
> > No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
> > discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects using
> > Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the second
> > communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions, etc.
> >
> > But I like chat too in some case.
>
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Adam Feng <cx...@gmail.com>.
Hi Tiago
Thanks for you suggestion.
As Raphael said, chat is only the second communications tool at ASF, the problem for us before was chatting too much(in some Chinese chat tools), now we should first make our mailing list active enough.
I think unofficial chat channels are fine, but I suggest bring all the developers to mailing list first and not create any official channel for now.
Thanks.
Adam Feng
On 7 Nov 2017, 5:52 AM +0800, wrote:
>
> Hi Tiago
>
> No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
> discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects using
> Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the second
> communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions, etc.
>
> But I like chat too in some case.
Re: How about creating a project channel?
Posted by Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com>.
Hi Tiago
Am .11.2017, 22:34 Uhr, schrieb Tiago Alves <tr...@gmail.com>:
> Hi all!
>
> For lots of people having a synchronous channel to talk about the
> project,
> ask quick questions, etc. is a very important piece of building a
> community
> around a framework. I happen to be one of those people :)
>
> As an apache incubated project, I'd guess a proprietary platform like
> Slack
> is out of question. How about a freenode irc channel? Or an official
> gitter
> channel?
No, we have no problem with proprietary channels, as long the main
discussions are on the Mailing lists. There are several projects using
Slack, others uses HipChat. Just keep in mind, chat it's only the second
communications tool at ASF. As you wrote, for quick questions, etc.
But I like chat too in some case.
Regards Raphael
--
My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU