You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com> on 2013/01/21 16:35:24 UTC
summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
I'm going to suggest that we leave all the lists in place for now, and
leave the choice of list to individual discretion.
For my part however I will be focusing on the user list, which I see as
a community wide list for anyone with an interest at AMQP related
software at Apache. I would encourage people to only use other lists if
they are convinced this is too wide an audience for their thread.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Posted by Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com>.
On 01/21/2013 04:04 PM, Justin Ross wrote:
> Finally, forgetting all this, the*first* thing I would change is jira
> traffic going to dev. I consider it strictly detrimental.
Yes, I tend to agree it would be nicer to have a distinct lists for
that, as for commits.
> My dream scheme:
>
> discussion@qpid.apache.org - human beings talking about qpid
> commits@qpid.apache.org - [no change]
> issues@qpid.apache.org - all jira traffic
> tests@qpid.apache.org - all jenkins and other automated test traffic
That pretty much is how I mentally picture the different types of traffic!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Posted by Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com>.
+1
Rajith
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Justin Ross <jr...@apache.org> wrote:
> For me, Gordon's stated summary is the best argument for one
> discussion list. The users/dev split is conventional, but it is not
> particularly good for our project. For one, the user/developer
> distinction is fuzzier for us than it is for many other projects. For
> two, the kind of content that Gordon has been posting (and will
> continue posting) to users is more conventionally posted to dev lists
> in other projects. I consider that a bad situation, because folks
> seeking, for instance, technical roadmap info could easily end up
> missing it because they're on the dev list, not the users list.
>
> Generally speaking, I think it's useful to introduce distinct lists
> (for users/dev and for components like proton) only if there is too
> much volume. I don't think we're there yet.
>
> Finally, forgetting all this, the *first* thing I would change is jira
> traffic going to dev. I consider it strictly detrimental.
>
> My dream scheme:
>
> discussion@qpid.apache.org - human beings talking about qpid
> commits@qpid.apache.org - [no change]
> issues@qpid.apache.org - all jira traffic
> tests@qpid.apache.org - all jenkins and other automated test traffic
>
> Thanks for hearing me out!
> Justin
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> I'm going to suggest that we leave all the lists in place for now, and leave
>> the choice of list to individual discretion.
>>
>> For my part however I will be focusing on the user list, which I see as a
>> community wide list for anyone with an interest at AMQP related software at
>> Apache. I would encourage people to only use other lists if they are
>> convinced this is too wide an audience for their thread.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented
communication)
Posted by Andrew Stitcher <as...@redhat.com>.
On Mon, 2013-01-21 at 11:04 -0500, Justin Ross wrote:
> My dream scheme:
>
> discussion@qpid.apache.org - human beings talking about qpid
> commits@qpid.apache.org - [no change]
> issues@qpid.apache.org - all jira traffic
> tests@qpid.apache.org - all jenkins and other automated test traffic
I wholeheartedly agree with this division.
[Perhaps you should have cross posted to all the mailing lists?!]
Andrew
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Posted by Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com>.
On 01/21/2013 06:31 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> In what sense are we special in our user/developer distinction? I can't
> really think of anything to particularly support that.
I don't know that we are special in anyway. I do think we are not great
at proactively communicating, and that while I would want to improve in
that, having more of the conversations that do take place visible to
users is in my view a good thing.
> In terms of JIRA traffic going to dev, actually I consider it detrimental
> that everyone filters JIRAs off and never bothers to actually look at JIRA.
> Patches continually sit on JIRAs for weeks/months/years before anyone picks
> them up (e.g when I send out an email moaning about how many hundred open
> JIRAs we have, or how many open JIRAs are assigned to already-released
> versions, at a particular point in time) as so many people clearly never
> bother looking at JIRA.
I agree, but I think that happens. Ultimately the solution there is
probably some sort of component owner system as suggested by Alan (and
I'm sure other in the past).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 21 January 2013 19:35, Justin Ross <jr...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In what sense are we special in our user/developer distinction? I can't
> > really think of anything to particularly support that.
>
> Not to make too much of it, but many of our users are themselves
> developers. They can understand and transition to straight up Qpid
> development with relative ease.
>
I can see what you are saying there though I think that is actually true
for a lot of projects, perhaps even the majority of those at the ASF for
example.
> Also, For most projects, in my experience, the users list is primarily
> for people seeking help. It's quite atypical to hold roadmap
> discussions on users lists.
>
> > In terms of JIRA traffic going to dev, actually I consider it detrimental
> > that everyone filters JIRAs off and never bothers to actually look at
> JIRA.
> > Patches continually sit on JIRAs for weeks/months/years before anyone
> picks
> > them up (e.g when I send out an email moaning about how many hundred open
> > JIRAs we have, or how many open JIRAs are assigned to already-released
> > versions, at a particular point in time) as so many people clearly never
> > bother looking at JIRA. That said, I do agree that such traffic shouldnt
> [snip]
>
> The moaning is of course completely justified. I don't, however,
> think that the experiment of addressing this problem by sending jira
> traffic to the devel list has succeeded.
>
I'm not sure I would call it an experiment given its always been that way
and its what many projects do given it is generally directly related to
development, but I can at least acknowledge that some projects do separate
JIRA traffic from their dev@ and user@ lists.
If we are intending to move most development related discussion away from
dev@ then I would probably just leave the existing list in place with the
JIRA traffic continuing to be directed at it, as asking the volunteer staff
to make new lists and update the various pieces to basically do the same
thing with a new name seems unnecessary (not to mention requiring everyone
update their subscriptions and/or filters).
> > If we were to make a new general discussion list (replacing users@ and
> > adding ddeelopment discussion) then discuss@ seems reasonable to me,
> but I
> > think the other things are served equally well by whats already here
> now. I
> > seem to recall picking notifications@ for the Jenkins emails because I
> read
> > previous mailing lsit creation requests where infra had pushed back on
> > other projects wanting myothername@ for their lists to be used for the
> same
> > purpose.
>
> I think notifications@ is fine.
>
> Justin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
>
>
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Posted by Justin Ross <jr...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Robbie Gemmell
<ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In what sense are we special in our user/developer distinction? I can't
> really think of anything to particularly support that.
Not to make too much of it, but many of our users are themselves
developers. They can understand and transition to straight up Qpid
development with relative ease.
Also, For most projects, in my experience, the users list is primarily
for people seeking help. It's quite atypical to hold roadmap
discussions on users lists.
> In terms of JIRA traffic going to dev, actually I consider it detrimental
> that everyone filters JIRAs off and never bothers to actually look at JIRA.
> Patches continually sit on JIRAs for weeks/months/years before anyone picks
> them up (e.g when I send out an email moaning about how many hundred open
> JIRAs we have, or how many open JIRAs are assigned to already-released
> versions, at a particular point in time) as so many people clearly never
> bother looking at JIRA. That said, I do agree that such traffic shouldnt
[snip]
The moaning is of course completely justified. I don't, however,
think that the experiment of addressing this problem by sending jira
traffic to the devel list has succeeded.
> If we were to make a new general discussion list (replacing users@ and
> adding ddeelopment discussion) then discuss@ seems reasonable to me, but I
> think the other things are served equally well by whats already here now. I
> seem to recall picking notifications@ for the Jenkins emails because I read
> previous mailing lsit creation requests where infra had pushed back on
> other projects wanting myothername@ for their lists to be used for the same
> purpose.
I think notifications@ is fine.
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
In what sense are we special in our user/developer distinction? I can't
really think of anything to particularly support that.
In terms of JIRA traffic going to dev, actually I consider it detrimental
that everyone filters JIRAs off and never bothers to actually look at JIRA.
Patches continually sit on JIRAs for weeks/months/years before anyone picks
them up (e.g when I send out an email moaning about how many hundred open
JIRAs we have, or how many open JIRAs are assigned to already-released
versions, at a particular point in time) as so many people clearly never
bother looking at JIRA. That said, I do agree that such traffic shouldnt go
to the same mailing list we inteded as the primary non-JIRA path for users
to be posting discussion on, so I guess that nullifies the issue (no pun
intended) if we were to do away with dev@.
If we were to make a new general discussion list (replacing users@ and
adding ddeelopment discussion) then discuss@ seems reasonable to me, but I
think the other things are served equally well by whats already here now. I
seem to recall picking notifications@ for the Jenkins emails because I read
previous mailing lsit creation requests where infra had pushed back on
other projects wanting myothername@ for their lists to be used for the same
purpose.
Robbie
On 21 January 2013 16:04, Justin Ross <jr...@apache.org> wrote:
> For me, Gordon's stated summary is the best argument for one
> discussion list. The users/dev split is conventional, but it is not
> particularly good for our project. For one, the user/developer
> distinction is fuzzier for us than it is for many other projects. For
> two, the kind of content that Gordon has been posting (and will
> continue posting) to users is more conventionally posted to dev lists
> in other projects. I consider that a bad situation, because folks
> seeking, for instance, technical roadmap info could easily end up
> missing it because they're on the dev list, not the users list.
>
> Generally speaking, I think it's useful to introduce distinct lists
> (for users/dev and for components like proton) only if there is too
> much volume. I don't think we're there yet.
>
> Finally, forgetting all this, the *first* thing I would change is jira
> traffic going to dev. I consider it strictly detrimental.
>
> My dream scheme:
>
> discussion@qpid.apache.org - human beings talking about qpid
> commits@qpid.apache.org - [no change]
> issues@qpid.apache.org - all jira traffic
> tests@qpid.apache.org - all jenkins and other automated test traffic
>
> Thanks for hearing me out!
> Justin
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > I'm going to suggest that we leave all the lists in place for now, and
> leave
> > the choice of list to individual discretion.
> >
> > For my part however I will be focusing on the user list, which I see as a
> > community wide list for anyone with an interest at AMQP related software
> at
> > Apache. I would encourage people to only use other lists if they are
> > convinced this is too wide an audience for their thread.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
>
>
Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Posted by Justin Ross <jr...@apache.org>.
For me, Gordon's stated summary is the best argument for one
discussion list. The users/dev split is conventional, but it is not
particularly good for our project. For one, the user/developer
distinction is fuzzier for us than it is for many other projects. For
two, the kind of content that Gordon has been posting (and will
continue posting) to users is more conventionally posted to dev lists
in other projects. I consider that a bad situation, because folks
seeking, for instance, technical roadmap info could easily end up
missing it because they're on the dev list, not the users list.
Generally speaking, I think it's useful to introduce distinct lists
(for users/dev and for components like proton) only if there is too
much volume. I don't think we're there yet.
Finally, forgetting all this, the *first* thing I would change is jira
traffic going to dev. I consider it strictly detrimental.
My dream scheme:
discussion@qpid.apache.org - human beings talking about qpid
commits@qpid.apache.org - [no change]
issues@qpid.apache.org - all jira traffic
tests@qpid.apache.org - all jenkins and other automated test traffic
Thanks for hearing me out!
Justin
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com> wrote:
> I'm going to suggest that we leave all the lists in place for now, and leave
> the choice of list to individual discretion.
>
> For my part however I will be focusing on the user list, which I see as a
> community wide list for anyone with an interest at AMQP related software at
> Apache. I would encourage people to only use other lists if they are
> convinced this is too wide an audience for their thread.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org