couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <>
Subject Re: [NOTICE] Create marketing@ lis (Was: Re: Marketing suggestion)
Date Tue, 04 Feb 2014 11:00:30 GMT
I agree.

If erlang@ becomes the place where newbie questions about Erlang go
ignored, we should can the list.

You requested examples:

Andy, how about two review dates? Six months, and then 12 months.

Let's review *all* lists on these dates.

On 4 February 2014 11:52, Benoit Chesneau <> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Noah Slater <> wrote:
>> Nick, I don't think you are filibustering. You raise a good point that
>> has not come up yet.
> actually I already raised it. And took the Erlang ml as an example of a
> very little traffic list. The advocacy list on postgresql, is also very
> little used. Even it was created 10 years ago.
>> Namely: what do we consider to be the success criteria of mailing
>> lists? And perhaps more importantly: what are the failure criteria?
>> Here's my attempt at answering those questions.
>> Success criteria:
>> - The mailing lists are occasionally used, and when questions are
>> posted there, replies are received.
>> - People who might not otherwise have been active start to become active.
>> Failure criteria:
>> - Mails posted to the list go unread/un-responded to.
>> - Something important for the whole community was missed because it
>> was happening away from the dev@ list.
> These are good points that actually can be applied to this erlang list. It
> is too soon to say the same for the others though.
> Anyway, This is why I think it's important to see what happen in other
> projects so we can anticipate what could happen. At least try to
> anticipate. Anticipation and planning are generally a good way to minimize
> failures. I mentionned some.
> - benoit

Noah Slater

View raw message