Mailing-List: contact core-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: core-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4aa34eb70906232247h16196524gece90ff1e88d4ad5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <C2563474-EB2D-4A17-AF16-334890FB4D5B@apache.org>
	 <4A400358.3070703@yahoo-inc.com> <4A400827.3090409@apache.org>
	 <4A402377.50107@cloudera.com>
	 <3A42F667-2FB8-42BC-A77D-9A8B1A906171@apache.org>
	 <4A411FB3.3010004@apache.org> <4A419FDC.6090304@cloudera.com>
	 <4aa34eb70906232247h16196524gece90ff1e88d4ad5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:32:38 -0700
Message-ID: <6e412fb10906240932j76c160b1s36f7234d7c915aa8@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: more information about project split
From: Amr Awadallah <aaa@cloudera.com>
To: core-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dhruba,

  I can't set email filters for which jiras I am interested in getting
full updates on, that would mean I have to set an additional filter
for each jira ticket one by one, not very scalable. Is that what you
suggesting?


On 6/23/09, Dhruba Borthakur <dhruba@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 for (4).
>
> This means that the default settings for a hadoop developer is to get
> eveyrthing via email. This allows anyone to set filter settings on his/her
> own email reader to prioritise which types of emails one would like to
> process-in-depth.
>
> -dhruba
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Amr Awadallah <aaa@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 for (2)  [assuming jira here means a separate mailing list that gets
>> the
>> full jira traffic]
>>
>> My main reasoning is: not all issues are relevant to all people, so we
>> should let folks select which issues they want to stay fully updated on
>> (that is why JIRA has the watch functionality). For those who want to keep
>> track of every single jira update going on then they can join the full
>> traffic list. I think that is a good compromise between both worlds. My 2
>> cents.
>>
>> -- amr
>>
>>
>> Doug Cutting wrote:
>>
>>> Owen O'Malley wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the community is better served by having a mailing list that is
>>>> dominated by people posting rather than a deluge of jira traffic.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is a somewhat false dichotomy: Jira messages are postings by people.
>>>  Folks should not make changes in Jira without realizing this. This is
>>> one
>>> reason why I've long advocated that we should remove the ability for
>>> folks
>>> to edit Jira comments or for anyone but admins to remove Jira comments.
>>> If
>>> we disable emails then this becomes even more essential: folks should not
>>> be
>>> able to re-write project history.
>>>
>>> Jira actions are project actions, and the Apache convention is that
>>> project actions should be logged on public mailing lists.  We should
>>> change
>>> that policy cautiously and only after consideration.
>>>
>>>  Choices:
>>>>  1. create/resolve/close to dev
>>>>  2. create/resolve/close to dev, others to jira
>>>>  3. create/comment/resolve/close to dev
>>>>  4. all to dev
>>>>
>>>> The problem with 3 is that you can add comments on most of the actions.
>>>> So either you capture all events or you only capture part of the
>>>> comments.
>>>>
>>>
>>> (4) Send create/resolve to -dev and all others to -issues (a new list)
>>> plus prohibit all comment edits and permit comment deletion only by
>>> admins.
>>>  (Closing is not generally interesting, since it's only done to seal an
>>> issue once its included in a release.)
>>>
>>> +1 for (4)
>>>
>>> Doug
>>>
>>
>