Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 50538 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2010 19:25:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 9 Sep 2010 19:25:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 54060 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 19:25:37 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 53827 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 19:25:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 53819 invoked by uid 99); 9 Sep 2010 19:25:36 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:25:36 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gstein@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.47] (HELO mail-bw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.214.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:25:15 +0000 Received: by bwz12 with SMTP id 12so1590786bwz.6 for ; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 12:24:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Jl5gkwMxwJkGQ/N6MZAYj17CfL+gW3suUxhowkfle/I=; b=fiImR4SaqD/XdzLLQKFw5EeZyiCiPPr2Mz6rKgkaMgGfrEHmG474y5UdszncJcik06 muO3HJS1lAYlvW6rsmnkznV6otYJN6dv2AQYptPJ6T7FraXwbQwSreOFwM3X+GKBh5uS HGNauFO+ngCYQNI4Ya//zBU1YMaXkIlCzf/2Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=hToVdNjl1HBHPzlR2Tr0kKCd5vNyqDI2hFPhFyHKSh5ZOSK+yFMZ8u5SqLttyuEnwx uOoml3O33+yEAuPd1uOq/BToSS47V4S8Ecz6FeK9K2jeyyk0oGhYId4iiOxoYKvpIv4S vKAg8+I/v+vQMrM6Jmf8DNHB2MG1uZsNwCgBQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.60.5 with SMTP id n5mr1081328bkh.162.1284060294896; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 12:24:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.117.133 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 12:24:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1284021763.1900.22.camel@rcm-desktop> References: <4C873855.5030102@gmail.com> <1283944783.2007.3.camel@rcm-desktop> <1284021763.1900.22.camel@rcm-desktop> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 15:24:54 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: No dev-, user- lists for small podlings (was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Kitty to Enter the Incubator) From: Greg Stein To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org The formation of your community is a BIG DEAL. Not something to casually sweep under the rug. Partitioning the community between users and devs makes it very difficult to establish a large, viable, sustainable community. If projects arrive at the Incubator with an already-built user community, then sure. Create separate lists. But small communities should (IMO) stick to a single dev@ list until you can't handle the traffic any more. If you started elsewhere with two lists, but your list traffic is still "small", then I would recommend combining them when arriving at the Incubator. It is obviously a call for each podling to make, so I'm simply recommending that all podlings consider the impact of dividing your community when you ask for separate dev/user lists. I believe it is rarely appropriate. Cheers, -g On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 04:42, Robert Matthews wrote: > I'm with James on this one. =A0Many good points have been made on this, > but we do have bigger things to worry about. > > > On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 08:06 -0400, James Carman wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:39 AM, dan haywood >> wrote: >> > >> > For the moment at least the dev community is more active (or at least = more >> > vocal), so their mailing list should be the main focal point. =A0As I = said in >> > the other email, when we have more user traffic than dev traffic, then >> > we can vote to split them out. >> > >> >> Why are we even having this discussion? =A0When did mailing lists become >> such a heavyweight operation that we have to discuss at length whether >> they should even exist? =A0Just create the user/dev/commits/issues lists >> and be done with it. =A0If nobody uses the user list, so be it. =A0I thi= nk >> it's just more confusing to start moving traffic from one list to >> another. =A0Keep things consistent. >> >> > And another benefit of putting user traffic on the dev list is that >> > it'll give the devs exposure to any probs that regular users are havin= g with >> > actually using the framework (ie so we can mature its documentation et= c) >> > >> >> The developers should be "listening" to the user list so that they can >> answer questions. =A0They can't just hide in the dev list and not listen >> to the community. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org