incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan King <r...@twitter.com>
Subject Re: IRC channel(s)
Date Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:57:19 GMT
Awesome.

-ryan

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Chris Goffinet <goffinet@digg.com> wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Great. I fully support this as well, it has been getting a bit noisy :)
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Eric Evans <eevans@rackspace.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Those of you who participate on IRC have probably noticed that we are
>> pretty regularly topping 200 users of late. That is an awesome indicator
>> of the projects vitality, but at some point increased traffic results in
>> decreased usefulness (at least for some).
>>
>> As a result, there is a new channel, #cassandra-dev (also on Freenode).
>> The idea is that this channel will be restricted to discussion of
>> cassandra development only, while the existing channel will continue to
>> be the place for support and development *against* cassandra.
>>
>> In order to make the new channel useful (and to prevent it from
>> diminishing #cassandra), I propose the following guidelines:
>>
>> 1. Anyone is free to join; there are no technological restrictions (i.e.
>> it's not moderated or invite-only).
>>
>> 2. On-topic is limited to the development *of* cassandra. Support
>> questions (and basically anything else) are off-topic.
>>
>> 3. If you are found to be off-topic, you'll be kindly redirected to
>> #cassandra (which in IMO is already an awesome resource for this).
>>
>> 4. Answering an off-topic question is considered off-topic. Goto #3 :)
>>
>> 5. The Cassandra community is an awesome bunch so I can't imagine that
>> one or two iterations of #3 wouldn't be enough, but...
>>
>> 5a. Repeated violation of the on-topic rule may result in additional
>> guidelines that specify decreasing levels of kindness and more forceful
>> forms of redirection. :)
>>
>> The rationale for (1) is that this isn't about exclusivity, we're merely
>> trying to increase usability. The rationale for (2) through (5a) is that
>> there is no value in having two channels unless some distinction is
>> enforced.
>>
>> Comments? Questions?
>>
>> --
>> Eric Evans
>> eevans@rackspace.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Chris Goffinet
>

Mime
View raw message