Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of mark.leicester@efurbishment.com
 designates 80.79.129.158 as permitted sender)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623)
In-Reply-To: <93737231e39b88f914e63908d8b7b1bf@apache.org>
References: <93737231e39b88f914e63908d8b7b1bf@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <2f6e935c1e83904f915cd444ae3b720e@efurbishment.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Mark Leicester <mark.leicester@efurbishment.com>
Subject: Re: [RT] seven good reasons to close down users@cocoon.apache.org
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 09:00:58 +0100
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org

Hi all,

When we discussed the issue of declining posts to the users list 
earlier this year (http://www.planetcocoon.com/node/1755 - the trend 
was visible back then too), I suggested interviewing subscribers about 
"what they want, what they don't like, their level of expertise, etc.". 
At that point (in May) people were fairly cool on the idea (e.g. "no, 
thanks. I really don't see any problem in cocoon's social health."). Is 
this still the case? Or, might it be time to put a questionnaire 
together - perhaps like http://www.planetcocoon.com/node/1774?

Cheers,
Mark

On 3 Oct 2005, at 20:20, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:

> In these days of wild thoughts, here's another one: how about closing 
> the users@ list and having just one list for cocoon-related 
> discussions?
>
> I think I have a few good reasons for this:
>
> One: The line between cocoon users and developers is fairly thin, it 
> is not as in Open Office for example, where most users do not even 
> know what the C language is. Our users are more and more competent 
> software developers who would often have interesting things to say if 
> they were around, and might like this place more if they felt more 
> involved. Cocoon has been finding its niche as a tool for serious 
> application developers, as opposed to a press-button publishing tool, 
> which it has never been and will never be.
>
> Two: my guess is that many dev@ subscribers could answer some users@ 
> questions very quickly, but sometimes we don't bother looking at the 
> list, and some of us are probably not even subscribed there. It's a 
> waste of energy, and has probably caused otherwise competent people to 
> go away after not getting good enough answers.
>
> Three: dev@ subscribers tend to use good messages subjects and [TOPIC 
> MARKERS] in subject lines to make the lists easy to filter, visually 
> or automatically. So I'm not worried about the increased traffic, 
> we'll find a way to make it sortable by teaching our community about 
> good subject lines or defining a few more [markers].  Okay, this is 
> not really a *reason*, but it's needed for my argumentation ;-D
>
> Four: for many subjects one does not know on which list to post, again 
> a waste of energy as threads regulary bounce between the lists. We 
> developers tend to discuss between ourselves things that are of 
> general interest, without bothering to move to users@ as it's not "our 
> home".
>
> Five: having two lists, one for Highly Qualified Meritocratic Core 
> Developers and another for Mere Users does not sound like the openness 
> and flat structure that we're advocating (I'm being a bit provocative 
> here, on purpose ;-)
>
> Six; the closing down of the docs@ list has only been positive, by 
> defragmenting the community w.r.t docs and allowing all developers to 
> be informed of what's happening with the [docs] (hint: note the good 
> use of the [marker]).
>
> Seven: Having a single point of discussion will help us know our users 
> better, this alone is worth its weight in bytes.
>
> So, WDYT?
>
> -Bertrand