From dev-return-70059-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@activemq.apache.org Thu Feb 21 15:33:53 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id D93DA18064C for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:33:52 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 46054 invoked by uid 500); 21 Feb 2019 15:33:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 46031 invoked by uid 99); 21 Feb 2019 15:33:51 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:33:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id BF433182658 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:33:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.201 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 089fuwHyt2dy for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:33:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf1-f171.google.com (mail-pf1-f171.google.com [209.85.210.171]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id B4020613A2 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f171.google.com with SMTP id i19so974861pfd.0 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 07:27:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=74/VLy/jtqrgzt2RiXhkncsxKIrKKTIbap1AGsW9zmw=; b=c6dro4Q/jex6R6JFPMuHqmLoXAjmkfp9f1fZTz13GZmFNWRf2esSKBtWOnTWiraIrl SlaQS1wZgc9RFTWgNm75yS6Du/szT17JU2EA7yVvkGRHEcMAAb4yNteLSAtf1xXtpi4I ShskqQlYTTj7cc6XzYDWtAdYSVECjrN35NMgU963pYkf555csGuY+qXlY/YUAsS1iK6w 2XNYG/JNYYeg4OKY+bfbWNJ9JhDCpDBWWJRNMfLrlVH2qEF4KQ6ikEifYbjLxCPLSK/U 8Jl3SVhBaoO5ytsGwHCMaahz3Uo75tK+UrzBe5QPgnLU19S05jzFaeHV+MtTIY8rxrp/ N2HQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=74/VLy/jtqrgzt2RiXhkncsxKIrKKTIbap1AGsW9zmw=; b=Qydd+zWwYVn/IfDR5C6VmuWKUKNltxus6trr35gho1iULPkKLXt4/JZGuYOSda5JDv yfdcjCCWSI5bmYJdRc9XsRPTrNkdFWm/kqObn9aCb99uLefnP0G3pOlY+JGluv5fG4Yy ntVcsKymrkcBXmBDmZNrp7kEk5miLDG/HPZXmEjO+AMZ8/Iud/6v4PVJ0BrHRtQ909wz OFn/97x2h5tksS1+U2CPbSXQS0ghvfS7Bk++n/PSlLFYfTfNX84Tln0VXXwt4+fShoCX LyG1PNWjbqx7ub3JBA5LM0tAw8N1N/qix4yLRTioT/IDvF/pgEvL/ky6cJ6OCPFvBpS9 Zyhg== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZVvvAc1tWJZXtcz/XeicpfPVuFo4nItt3YiiIaeB2LicqnHs+J r2KwZPebenr5J6ULXuXizvVpymaMI79+PpPVbJiovQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbarjoMl4YeY0jdPE3V+E89AHZFOQCQsfPVPZHGnMYOvRXjfjQKnw2KDQmRuHFum/ODKaKwbu0tyQUK8fa6mRU= X-Received: by 2002:a63:ce41:: with SMTP id r1mr20268989pgi.119.1550762855480; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 07:27:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5c696dfa.1c69fb81.8bb98.7743SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Clebert Suconic Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 10:27:23 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list To: dev@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable lets make it simple: I suggest we create a list called gitbox@activemq.apache.org, and move the traffic from gitbox/github discussions there. On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:19 AM Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > Comments inline > > On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 13:30, Clebert Suconic = wrote: > > > > This is a simple task. I did not think it would be a big deal. > > Agreed. It is a simple task and need not be considered a big deal. I > only take issue with the previously unsaid assumption around using > commits@, and the seeming kneejerk acting upon it without stated > timeline or opportunity to discuss. There is a simple fix to address > this. > > If for example you had sent a mail a few days ago, containing a lazy > consensus statement around what specifically you were planning to do > and when (request on Wednesday that they be moved to commits@) and > lots of folks agreed or noone disagreed, then there was every chance I > wouldnt have sent any mail on the subject at all. > > As it happens, I do disagree with the use of commits@, so once I saw > that was what you had already requested without saying that > previously, I emailed to say so. If everyone else thinks the PR > comments belong on commits@, then thats fair enough for me. > > > Those > > gitbox messages on the list are noise. (Everyone just filters them out)= . > > Although not really important here, for completeness, as I have said I > wont actually filter them out. After we move them to another list, > I'll filter these mails back to the same place they go currently > alongside the dev@ content (and did similarly when the JIRA mails > moved over to issues@a.a.o). > > >I don=E2=80=99t see a point in keeping them on dev list. I can filter th= em out. But > > that doesn=E2=80=99t make it easy on non committees looking at our list= . > > > > I didnt say they have to stay on dev@. I would personally leave them > there, as it seems several others would, but to be clear I have been > mailing today entirely on the basis that they will be moving. > > > I updated the JiRA accordingly. I think the name is sensible enough. > > > > What you think is not necessarily a consensus though, and it is good > to give at least the chance for other people to say what they think. > It doesnt need to be some huge elaborate process, a simple "I will ask > tomorrow that they redirect to if noone objects" might have > sufficed if everyone thought was a great name or didnt actually > care what its called. > > The traffic has been where it is for years, so taking some hours/days > to openly agree on specifically where it goes doesn't seem out of the > way. Especially if its a new list that will be around for years. > > > If you ok with everything we can move ahead. On that case update the JI= RA. > > If not please let Me know. > > I'm not ok proceeding yet as its not just my decision or just your > decision, and I dont think a sufficient discussion has occurred or > suitable lazy consensus opportunity been given yet. > > As I've said, I think issues@ is preferable to commits@ if reusing an > existing list, and what I would personally go with. If others think > commits@ is the way to go, thats fine. If a new list is preferred > instead then we should agree what it is to be called, and once > censensus (lazy or not) is reached, create it. > > After one of those approaches is settled on, we ask infra to proceed > with the redirection to the target list. > > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 7:54 AM Robbie Gemmell > > wrote: > > > > > Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest > > > specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested > > > email address of gitbox@activemq.a.o? > > > > > > Robbie > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have b= een > > > > fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the > > > > JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Follo= wed > > > > by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.o= rg? > > > > > > > > Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem > > > > like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists. > > > > > > > > If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be > > > > good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consens= us > > > > statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to upd= ate > > > > things to use it. > > > > > > > > Robbie > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the lis= t > > > > > name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there) > > > > > > > > > > I will change the JIRA to be on its own list. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell < > > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear > > > period > > > > > > to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate= it. > > > > > > This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days= , but > > > > > > discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as > > > > > > discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion > > > suggests > > > > > > otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of th= e > > > > > > details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really pro= perly > > > > > > discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' w= as the > > > > > > terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was onl= y > > > > > > mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on= PRs > > > > > > belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where t= he > > > JIRA > > > > > > traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd sa= y that > > > > > > makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely = new > > > > > > list. > > > > > > > > > > > > If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we > > > should > > > > > > actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that In= fra to > > > > > > hold off moving things while we do so. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine= where > > > > > > they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same app= lies > > > in > > > > > > reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back i= nto > > > the > > > > > > same place they were going originally. > > > > > > > > > > > > Robbie > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic < > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbo= x > > > > > > > messages to the commit message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don=E2=80=99t get me wrong. I can do with filters persona= lly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joi= ning > > > in. Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just > > > joining) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What about this. We could ask Infra to move GitHub message= s to > > > a new list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anywa= ys. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce < > > > michael.andre.pearce@me.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequ= ate, > > > and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it = will > > > all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone= . > > > > > > > >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic < > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com> Date: 15/02/2019 22:39 (GMT+00:00) To: > > > dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messa= ges > > > on a separate list The thing is. I can do fine with filtering. So i= n a > > > way I=E2=80=99m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am= putting > > > myself in the shoes of someone coming on board now. Justtrying to ma= ke it > > > easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shann= on < > > > christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> wrote:> I am +0 on this because eith= er > > > way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either > > > addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic righ= t now > > > obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup o= n my > > > gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one la= bel > > > and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue. I im= agine > > > most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 = at > > > 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic >> wrote:>> > Peo= ple > > > are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On = Fri, > > > Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske wrote:> >> >= > > > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> = more> > > > > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github > > > messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires cons= tant > > > cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subj= ects > > > that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri= , Feb > > > 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com= >> > > > > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis. We h= ad > > > some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we dec= ided > > > to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters. Etc.> = > > >> > > > > > > But this doesn=E2=80=99t make easy to recruit new open source = devs.> > > >> > > > > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because = there> > > > is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough = to > > > follow. So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separ= ate > > > list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic = and > > > important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectura= l > > > decisions. Releases. And eventually> > even> > > > codes but withou= t the > > > clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >>= > > > > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suco= nic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Clebert Suconic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Clebert Suconic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Clebert Suconic > > > > > -- > > Clebert Suconic --=20 Clebert Suconic