You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@netbeans.apache.org by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> on 2017/02/27 16:02:39 UTC

Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Hi,

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:33 PM, someone wrote:
> ...(he) and I have been having some DM discussions offline on Slack as an example, and we have been
> discussing what it means to have modules...

It would be great to bring such discussions here as soon as they
become "important".

My (own, unwritten) rule in Apache projects is to move things to the
dev list as soon as they go beyond the level of a coffee machine
discussion - and when they do, restart the discussions here stating
what happened at the coffee machine.

Slack is of course quicker than email and probably better for
brainstorming, so I suppose a combination is best...but the benefits
of having a Single Place Where Important Things happen (in
asynchronous mode) are huge when it comes to long-lived projects like
NetBeans.

-Bertrand (with my incubation mentor hat on)

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...It really started off with us discussing the way some code works, and then led to some other conversations, and now has led here...

That's great then!

I didn't follow the whole trail, just was under the impression that
things were happening on Slack *instead* of here. If that's not the
case that's fantastic.

Thanks for clarifying,
-Bertrand

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org>.
Isn’t that perhaps the way it has worked out in this case? I agree with the base premise of what you are saying, but wondering how it would bubble up in a different way. It really started off with us discussing the way some code works, and then led to some other conversations, and now has led here.

Thanks,

Wade


> On Feb 27, 2017, at 11:02, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:33 PM, someone wrote:
>> ...(he) and I have been having some DM discussions offline on Slack as an example, and we have been
>> discussing what it means to have modules...
> 
> It would be great to bring such discussions here as soon as they
> become "important".
> 
> My (own, unwritten) rule in Apache projects is to move things to the
> dev list as soon as they go beyond the level of a coffee machine
> discussion - and when they do, restart the discussions here stating
> what happened at the coffee machine.
> 
> Slack is of course quicker than email and probably better for
> brainstorming, so I suppose a combination is best...but the benefits
> of having a Single Place Where Important Things happen (in
> asynchronous mode) are huge when it comes to long-lived projects like
> NetBeans.
> 
> -Bertrand (with my incubation mentor hat on)

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.
<snip>

Bottom line, I suggest you (re-)read the 'communication' part in this page :


http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#management



-- 
Emmanuel Lecharny

Symas.com
directory.apache.org

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:50 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> ..."Can it be forgotten tomorrow, and we are just as wise?"...

I like that, "we" being the whole group, i.e. dev@ subscribers.

-Bertrand

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...I also hope it is a good component of a dev tools track at next years Apache Confs :-)...

At this point my dream tool is a bridge that allows people to use
either a slack-like interface or an email client to talk on a single
channel which is the dev list ;-)

-Bertrand

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> .... clearly everyone is in agreement on this and we're all just
> rephrasing each other's words, the Slack channel -- or anything other than
> this mailing list -- are secondary to this mailing list and this mailing
> list is where anything of significance is decided and nailed down.

Yes, I don't think there are any concerns, and that everyone are aware of
what works and when.

Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
All this is a good discussion and let's continue it.

From my point of view, I have so many channels to follow -- Twitter,
Facebook, mailing lists, and more. I very rarely, although I intended to do
so when the NetBeans Slach channel was set up, use Slack.

A concern I have with NetBeans on Slack is that invariable you have
discussions with one or two people, nothing can really be decided beyond
those one or two people, and so the discussion fizzles out. I agree with
earlier comments in this thread -- Slack has its uses, specifically when
something between a few people needs to be hammered out.

But we must avoid the situation where someone starts off a thread on the
Apache NetBeans dev mailing list with something like "as decided in the
NetBeans Slack channel" or "as discussed in the NetBeans Slack channel".
I.e., but clearly everyone is in agreement on this and we're all just
rephrasing each other's words, the Slack channel -- or anything other than
this mailing list -- are secondary to this mailing list and this mailing
list is where anything of significance is decided and nailed down.

Gj

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org>
wrote:

>
> > On Mar 1, 2017, at 23:50, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > And I wouldn't use such channels for feature discussion or even
> announcing
> > what I will work on next. I.e. "Can it be forgotten tomorrow, and we are
> > just as wise?”
> >
>
> Sure, my point on working on a feature from the perspective of Slack is
> that there are conversations on the list and even in Jira that happen in
> the right time and place, and that Slack is a good utility when a small
> group working on said feature is actually banging out on the keyboard the
> things from those mediums. Often people plan to work on things at the exact
> same time, even across timezones, as we in the NB community have done many
> times including using Google Docs to edit a shared document in real time.
>
> As an example, I do not think we can even say the lists are the best place
> to search for the best way to do something necessarily as a community
> responsibility is to put knowledge deficits in an FAQ or official
> documentation which we see raised and discussed on lists; an official
> merger of possibly right, wrong, half right, and half wrong answers that
> tend to popup on lists; a hallmark of Apache projects and NetBeans to me
> has been good documentation. If on the list, it will be searchable, but
> getting to that specific email can often be difficult, and if not
> transitioned to documentation and organized remains in an non-optimal
> place, and thus each and every tool has its better usages and use cases,
> and just want that to be the focus and clear.
>
>
> > End of the day, if you don't take our advice, the project will
> > die. And ASF as a whole will carry on, no big deal.
>
> I agree with most of what you have written Niclas, but I think this one is
> a little strong, and you may not have meant it to be. I mean, NB has been
> around for quite a long time as well, and we have a functioning and strong
> community, and we have used various dynamic tools similar to Slack to
> achieve different aspects of what we have done, even to the point of
> actively working together to focus on growing our community in dynamic IRC
> discussions. I agree we should all strongly consider yours and others
> advice however, and we should everyone consider the nuances of one
> another’s views.
>
> I’m sure similar things I’m suggesting happen with Apache now in different
> capacities and mediums such as BarCamps as well as when a project is being
> discussed behind the scenes with someone who will essentially sponsor it
> when it comes time to incubate, and those type things seem good examples
> and use cases of such things which are quite dynamic to only the people
> there, at that time, before the dynamics come in some form to a wider
> audience.
>
> Just to stress it; I’m merely suggesting different mediums can be used in
> different ways to help grow the community and work together, and want to be
> sure we collectively see the value in the differences versus leaving an air
> that one is bad or not useful, and knowing when and where to use what is
> the most important aspect.
>
> > And this mail is not
> > bearing judgment on whether any of this has been done incorrectly, I
> simply
> > don't know. It is just a general advice, food for thought, because I hope
> > that Netbeans will become a flagship project at ASF.
> >
> >
>
> Understood and agree. I also hope that for NetBeans as well. I also hope
> it is a good component of a dev tools track at next years Apache Confs :-)
> I sadly can’t make this years as I already had budget set aside for other
> conferences.
>
> Thanks everyone,
>
> Wade

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org>.
> On Mar 1, 2017, at 23:50, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> And I wouldn't use such channels for feature discussion or even announcing
> what I will work on next. I.e. "Can it be forgotten tomorrow, and we are
> just as wise?”
> 

Sure, my point on working on a feature from the perspective of Slack is that there are conversations on the list and even in Jira that happen in the right time and place, and that Slack is a good utility when a small group working on said feature is actually banging out on the keyboard the things from those mediums. Often people plan to work on things at the exact same time, even across timezones, as we in the NB community have done many times including using Google Docs to edit a shared document in real time.

As an example, I do not think we can even say the lists are the best place to search for the best way to do something necessarily as a community responsibility is to put knowledge deficits in an FAQ or official documentation which we see raised and discussed on lists; an official merger of possibly right, wrong, half right, and half wrong answers that tend to popup on lists; a hallmark of Apache projects and NetBeans to me has been good documentation. If on the list, it will be searchable, but getting to that specific email can often be difficult, and if not transitioned to documentation and organized remains in an non-optimal place, and thus each and every tool has its better usages and use cases, and just want that to be the focus and clear.


> End of the day, if you don't take our advice, the project will
> die. And ASF as a whole will carry on, no big deal.

I agree with most of what you have written Niclas, but I think this one is a little strong, and you may not have meant it to be. I mean, NB has been around for quite a long time as well, and we have a functioning and strong community, and we have used various dynamic tools similar to Slack to achieve different aspects of what we have done, even to the point of actively working together to focus on growing our community in dynamic IRC discussions. I agree we should all strongly consider yours and others advice however, and we should everyone consider the nuances of one another’s views.

I’m sure similar things I’m suggesting happen with Apache now in different capacities and mediums such as BarCamps as well as when a project is being discussed behind the scenes with someone who will essentially sponsor it when it comes time to incubate, and those type things seem good examples and use cases of such things which are quite dynamic to only the people there, at that time, before the dynamics come in some form to a wider audience.

Just to stress it; I’m merely suggesting different mediums can be used in different ways to help grow the community and work together, and want to be sure we collectively see the value in the differences versus leaving an air that one is bad or not useful, and knowing when and where to use what is the most important aspect.

> And this mail is not
> bearing judgment on whether any of this has been done incorrectly, I simply
> don't know. It is just a general advice, food for thought, because I hope
> that Netbeans will become a flagship project at ASF.
> 
> 

Understood and agree. I also hope that for NetBeans as well. I also hope it is a good component of a dev tools track at next years Apache Confs :-) I sadly can’t make this years as I already had budget set aside for other conferences.

Thanks everyone,

Wade

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org>
wrote:

> Humans also like to use modern paradigms. Slack is one of those. We have
> Slack and IRC, and should be accessible in my opinion.

Yes

> I also have an appreciation for bringing things to the list to run
concepts
> by others, or make decisions. However, I hope we can all see the value in
> mediums, and not have a dialogue which imparts a notion those things are
> bad or should not be done.

My own yardstick is something like this;

* What do I know now, from being part of that discussion, that I would
otherwise not know?


> I believe the point and take away from this discussion is we should be
> aware of the difference in human dynamics, interaction, and accessibility,
> and the time to bring something to the wider Apache community, and be
> responsible.

The more valuable one find the alternate channel, the more worrisome it
should be to longevity of community.
Example;

We use Slack/IRC to speed up communications. We think that will make the
project move faster. And for those "in the know" and highly engaged in the
project (high value community members), that is undeniably true. But, it
will also include discussion, so rapid that a bystander can't follow, can't
learn and probably can't ask questions even if the bystander is reasonably
in the project. That leads in the long-run to no new high value community
members joining the ranks, which means both that there is a stagnation at
the bleeding-edge but also when someone like you , Wade, for whatever
reason, leaves the project, it is a massive hit, since the 'pool of growth'
is very dry.

What the ASF as a whole have found out over 2 decades is that "growing
members in the community" is a more viable long-term strategy than "working
on codebase". If I can educate 4-5 new people, it is likely that one or
more can fill my shoes if I leave.

So, personally, I think that the best use of Slack/IRC/phone/Skype are in
the following areas;
* Discussion of bugs, replication, maybe using each others environments and
so on.
* Conflict resolution; if there is a strong disagreement over something,
then face-to-face or video conferencing can often more easily
resolve/arbitrate the situation.
* Social; We are happier if we know each other better. Shouting out what we
find funny, weird or irritating can lead to a stronger social environment.

And I wouldn't use such channels for feature discussion or even announcing
what I will work on next. I.e. "Can it be forgotten tomorrow, and we are
just as wise?"


Finally, we "old-timers" are not trying to force a way of working on the
project. End of the day, if you don't take our advice, the project will
die. And ASF as a whole will carry on, no big deal. And this mail is not
bearing judgment on whether any of this has been done incorrectly, I simply
don't know. It is just a general advice, food for thought, because I hope
that Netbeans will become a flagship project at ASF.


Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...Humans also like to use modern paradigms. Slack is one of those...

This tweet [1] comes right in time, quoting it:

  them: is that written down?
  me: we communicate in the viking tradition.
  Let me tell you the saga of that system.

In Apache projects we want the dev list to tell the saga of the system.

-Bertrand

[1] https://twitter.com/mccv/status/433006011847176193

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.

Le 01/03/2017 à 13:43, Wade Chandler a écrit :
> I understand the points on decisions being made on the mailing lists, but
> humans make these decisions, and as humans we often have dynamic and active
> discussions before such decisions are made or even brought to a more open
> or official forum.
>
> Sometimes a group may be working on a feature or a code change, and the
> official communication from that session may be a merge or a pull request
> with comments in the code and git.
>
> Humans also like to use modern paradigms. Slack is one of those. We have
> Slack and IRC, and should be accessible in my opinion.

Nobody says that IRC or slack should not be acessible or used.

The point is that the more you use such synchronous channels, the more
you are excluding those who aren't present on those channels when
discussions occurs.

And this is the problem : from a community standpoint, this is not good.

-- 
Emmanuel Lecharny

Symas.com
directory.apache.org

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org>.
I understand the points on decisions being made on the mailing lists, but
humans make these decisions, and as humans we often have dynamic and active
discussions before such decisions are made or even brought to a more open
or official forum.

Sometimes a group may be working on a feature or a code change, and the
official communication from that session may be a merge or a pull request
with comments in the code and git.

Humans also like to use modern paradigms. Slack is one of those. We have
Slack and IRC, and should be accessible in my opinion.

Apache projects have used IRC for years, such as Tomcat and Groovy. Apache
BarCamps surely provide some examples of dynamics I am referring to. I have
had personal interactions with community members offline, where things were
then brought to the mailing lists for Tomcat and others, and imagine others
do too.

I also have an appreciation for bringing things to the list to run concepts
by others, or make decisions. However, I hope we can all see the value in
mediums, and not have a dialogue which imparts a notion those things are
bad or should not be done.

I believe the point and take away from this discussion is we should be
aware of the difference in human dynamics, interaction, and accessibility,
and the time to bring something to the wider Apache community, and be
responsible.

I assume that is the point being stressed here, and there is an
appreciation for mediums and human interaction for various reasons
including creativity. I want to be sure we end this on a clear note, so if
this is not what others understand or believe, please clarify.

Thanks

Wade

On Feb 28, 2017 8:21 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" <bd...@apache.org>
wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Neil C Smith
> <ne...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > ...Slack is also transient and a larger community can quickly get to a
> > point where the archive only lasts a few weeks...
>
> And even if the archive is permanent that doesn't help much for
> jumping late into a discussion that started a few days ago, which is
> an essential part of the type of deep, slow discussions that are
> required to build complex things.
>
> -Bertrand
>

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Neil C Smith
<ne...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ...Slack is also transient and a larger community can quickly get to a
> point where the archive only lasts a few weeks...

And even if the archive is permanent that doesn't help much for
jumping late into a discussion that started a few days ago, which is
an essential part of the type of deep, slow discussions that are
required to build complex things.

-Bertrand

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Neil C Smith <ne...@googlemail.com>.
On 28 February 2017 at 08:56, Timon Veenstra <mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Conversations like on slack usually don't make good documentation ....
> Transferring this common practice, when someone says something worth
> remembering on slack, we put it on the wiki (or issue tracker when its bug
> related).

I'm not sure we're saying different things - in fact, totally agree at
transferring this common practice!  I was reiterating Bertrand's
initial point about *restarting* discussions here, and the importance
of a canonical place for dialogue, with the point that Slack is also
transient and a larger community can quickly get to a point where the
archive only lasts a few weeks.  That can be a problem if the
important parts of a conversation haven't made it out in time!

I'm not advocating for a system with a better archive / logging
necessarily.  Personally, I'm not a much of a Slack fan at all. :-)

Best wishes,

Neil

-- 
Neil C Smith
Artist & Technologist
www.neilcsmith.net

Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Timon Veenstra <mo...@gmail.com>.
>
>
> things might get lost that are important without us realising,
> particularly in channels other than #general.  Whether the solution is
> logging or another similar service with better archiving, I don't
> know.  I do think it's a communication medium that ends up being used
> in a way that's not quite comparable to DM though.
>
> Conversations like on slack usually don't make good documentation. Just
like in a real world meeting, when someone says something worth
remembering, you make a note. Audio record the entire meeting is much less
efficient.
Transferring this common practice, when someone says something worth
remembering on slack, we put it on the wiki (or issue tracker when its bug
related). When nobody makes a note, apparently nobody thought it was worth
remembering.

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Neil C Smith <ne...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,

On 27 February 2017 at 18:03, Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> There are logging solutions to deal with that which we are discussing on Slack. Too, I think “key” conversations is the key ... we will bring important things to the list once we feel like we have something logical to say.

I wasn't suggesting anything other than that with this list, although
what is "key" is not necessarily immediately known.  It was just a
comment based on personal experience that without logging of Slack,
things might get lost that are important without us realising,
particularly in channels other than #general.  Whether the solution is
logging or another similar service with better archiving, I don't
know.  I do think it's a communication medium that ends up being used
in a way that's not quite comparable to DM though.

Best wishes,

Neil

-- 
Neil C Smith
Artist & Technologist
www.neilcsmith.net

Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Wade Chandler <wa...@apache.org>.
There are logging solutions to deal with that which we are discussing on Slack. Too, I think “key” conversations is the key. A dynamic conversation between a couple to a few people is exactly what we would do if at a conference too, and we are not going to sit there emailing each other or the list; we will bring important things to the list once we feel like we have something logical to say. I don’t think this particular situation would be any different otherwise, as we were DMing each other. Even if we were using Skype or something else that would be the case. But, we’ll get a logging solution in place to make that just as good as IRC logging with better editing experiences.


Wade

> On Feb 27, 2017, at 12:38, Neil C Smith <ne...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 27 February 2017 at 16:02, Bertrand Delacretaz
> <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> My (own, unwritten) rule in Apache projects is to move things to the
>> dev list as soon as they go beyond the level of a coffee machine
>> discussion - and when they do, restart the discussions here stating
>> what happened at the coffee machine.
> 
> I understand what Wade said about this case, but I'd very much like to
> reiterate the importance of "restart the discussions here stating what
> happened".  Unless we have a benefactor with some seriously deep
> pockets, we're stuck with the free edition of Slack, which has a
> limited archive - and the more we discuss the shorter the archive!
> I'm involved with another Slack community where this is starting to
> become an annoying limitation, and some key conversations get
> forgotten.
> 
> If it's a conversation method that works for us, we might consider an
> open-source self-hosted option?  eg. something like Mattermost, etc.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Neil
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Neil C Smith
> Artist & Technologist
> www.neilcsmith.net
> 
> Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.

Le 27/02/2017 à 18:38, Neil C Smith a écrit :
> On 27 February 2017 at 16:02, Bertrand Delacretaz
> <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> My (own, unwritten) rule in Apache projects is to move things to the
>> dev list as soon as they go beyond the level of a coffee machine
>> discussion - and when they do, restart the discussions here stating
>> what happened at the coffee machine.
> I understand what Wade said about this case, but I'd very much like to
> reiterate the importance of "restart the discussions here stating what
> happened".  Unless we have a benefactor with some seriously deep
> pockets, we're stuck with the free edition of Slack, which has a
> limited archive - and the more we discuss the shorter the archive!
> I'm involved with another Slack community where this is starting to
> become an annoying limitation, and some key conversations get
> forgotten.
>
> If it's a conversation method that works for us, we might consider an
> open-source self-hosted option?  eg. something like Mattermost, etc.


I would strongly suggest you have any technical discussion on the
project mailing list. Slack, or whatever real-time system is excluding
people, and should be avoided.

Sooner or later you are going to have committers from any TZ, and it's
impossible for someone in Australia, for instance, to cope with a
discussion occuring on ETZ.

As Bertrand said, if it's a very simple discussion between peers, that
could be fine, but as soon as it get deeper - and it almost always get
deeper -, then it belongs to the mailing list. The problem is that it's
quite hard to switch from Slack to the Mailing list...

-- 
Emmanuel Lecharny

Symas.com
directory.apache.org

Re: Slack vs dev list (was: Code contribution process.)

Posted by Neil C Smith <ne...@googlemail.com>.
On 27 February 2017 at 16:02, Bertrand Delacretaz
<bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> My (own, unwritten) rule in Apache projects is to move things to the
> dev list as soon as they go beyond the level of a coffee machine
> discussion - and when they do, restart the discussions here stating
> what happened at the coffee machine.

I understand what Wade said about this case, but I'd very much like to
reiterate the importance of "restart the discussions here stating what
happened".  Unless we have a benefactor with some seriously deep
pockets, we're stuck with the free edition of Slack, which has a
limited archive - and the more we discuss the shorter the archive!
I'm involved with another Slack community where this is starting to
become an annoying limitation, and some key conversations get
forgotten.

If it's a conversation method that works for us, we might consider an
open-source self-hosted option?  eg. something like Mattermost, etc.

Best wishes,

Neil



-- 
Neil C Smith
Artist & Technologist
www.neilcsmith.net

Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org