cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <kdam...@apache.org>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Email etiquette CC or not CC
Date Thu, 24 Jan 2013 02:22:06 GMT
Lol, I am in agreement with you Rohit!

I just don't see in the list a CLEAR answer to this thread.
 


>-----Original Message-----
>From: rohityadav89@gmail.com [mailto:rohityadav89@gmail.com] On Behalf
>Of Rohit Yadav
>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 4:17 PM
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Email etiquette CC or not CC
>
>On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Sheng Yang <sheng@yasker.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:11 PM,  <kdamage@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Can we get a firm answer if we are go for abusing the reply-all button
now?
>>
>> +1 on abusing reply-all button.
>
>+1 i.e. to say fix your email client and not the ML.
>
>>
>> --Sheng
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> -kd
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sheng@yasker.org]
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 3:44 PM
>>>>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Email etiquette CC or not CC
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Rohit Yadav <bhaisaab@apache.org>
>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Even if we adopt ccing, it is a convention to get a more
>>>>>>>> efficient
>>> traffic
>>>>flow.  It is not a must.  It is your responsibility to adopt the
>>> conventions that
>>>>have evolved on the list to make the list more efficient such as
>>>>tagged
>>> topics
>>>>and ccing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's the follow up?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we agree to try adapt CC style?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think so, I see few emails with CCs in them. Send emails with CC
>>>>> to respective person boldly, and let them configure their email
>>>>> client so the email does not show up as two emails in their inbox.
>>>>
>>>>One thing need to be done from manager of the mailing list. Currently
>>>>the mailing list automatically remove all the CC/TO except mailing
>>>>list address
>>> itself
>>>>when sending out the mails, and no way to get people CCed
>>>>automatically after that.
>>>>
>>>>And with CC, the most important thing to remember is: Reply All. It
>>>>would
>>> be a
>>>>common mistakes when we start trying it, but I am sure we would be
>>>>used to it soon.
>>>>
>>>>--Sheng
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I meant try to adopt CC style.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Sheng
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Sheng
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --Alex
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sheng@yasker.org]
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:01 PM
>>>>>>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Email etiquette CC or not CC
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>> <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Edison Su
>>>>>>>>> > <Edison.su@citrix.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>> >>      I am struggling to read all the emails
on dev list
>>>>>>>>> >> everyday, it's just so
>>>>>>>>> many emails. Is it possible, that enable/allow/encourage
us CC
>>>>>>>>> to somebody if you think the topic he/she should take
a look
>>>>>>>>> at? I think it will save both of us a lot of time.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Edison,
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > I'm fine with CC'ing someone specific when I know
that I need
>>>>>>>>> > their attention, but two caveats that I'm worried
about are:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > 1 - I find myself often needing the whole community's
>>>>>>>>> > attention, for VOTE threads or release planning
updates,
>>>>>>>>> > etc...  I struggle to understand how folks want
to see this.
>>>>>>>>> > I thought that VOTE and ACS41 would be sufficient
headers for
>>>>>>>>> > people to actually pay attention to, but it appears
to not be
>working.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I believe the header should be sufficient in the most
case, and
>>>>>>>>> that's exactly what's mostly other community did. But
as you
>>>>>>>>> feel that it's not working well, that's probably means,
people
>>>>>>>>> are lazy, in nature(though I think it's may be improved
with
>>>>>>>>> CC'ing someone directly, but this should not be an issue
even
>>>>>>>>> with our current mailing list policy).
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > 2 - If someone starts a thread, I would expect that
they
>>>>>>>>> > would actually pay attention to that thread!  I've
seen times
>>>>>>>>> > when people start a thread, but don't respond to
queries from
>>>>>>>>> > others in the community.  This is especially vexing
when the
>>>>>>>>> > thread is about a work that's in progress.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's exactly what we want to address. People are not
intently
>>>>>>>>> drop the thread, most of time, they just forgot.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you start e.g. 5 threads in a day, you maybe miss
one or two
>>>>>>>>> of them in the next day. Or you start a thread one week
ago but
>>>>>>>>> only got response 1 week later, you also may be miss
it
>>>>>>>>> completely. And I personally feel even I am intently
to find
>>>>>>>>> back my thread, it would take 10s even 30s to find my
thread -
>>>>>>>>> it's very possible I missed it when skim for the first
time,
>>>>>>>>> then realize where is that thread? Then check back again(that's
>>>>>>>>> what's happened to me this morning). That's very annoying.
I
>>>>>>>>> suppose we would deal with the mailing list based on
a
>>>>>>>>> priority, even we would skim them all. Of course on the
top of
>>>>>>>>> priority list is the threads I involved. But I cannot
tell
>>>>>>>>> which one it is with a glimpse in tens even hundreds
of mails.
>>>>>>>>> What's we want, is we can pay attention to our threads
>>> easily.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LKML received hundreds of mail every day, I cannot image
how
>>>>>>>>> can Linus Torvalds or Andrew Morton survive if the mail
is only
>>>>>>>>> sent to mailing list, and they have to go through all
the mails
>>>>>>>>> to find out which one got their attention yesterday(though
I
>>>>>>>>> also believe they got tons of CC or TO mails as well).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --Sheng
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > -chip
>>>


Mime
View raw message