incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (398J)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Aurora for Incubation
Date Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:10:58 GMT
Sure, makes sense to me.

Cheers,
Chris

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++






-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 4:08 PM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Aurora for Incubation

>Hi Marvin, Dave,
>
>+1 for dev@, private@ and commits@ lists for start.
>
>If Aurora picks up more clients as "user" which making dev@ list too noisy
>we could always request for user@ list.
>
>- Henry
>
>
>On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Marvin Humphrey
><marvin@rectangular.com>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Dave Lester <dave@ischool.berkeley.edu>
>> wrote:
>> > We recommended an aurora-user list because Aurora is currently
>> > production-ready and used by Twitter. We anticipate that once we have
>>an
>> > initial release in the Incubator, it will be straightforward to for
>> current
>> > Mesos users to begin using Aurora. Development discussion would still
>> made
>> > on aurora-dev. How does that sound?
>>
>> See <http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/MailingListOptions>.
>>
>> For small-ish projects, we recommend that user traffic be shunted onto
>>the
>> dev
>> list at first because we have observed that great new contributors tend
>>to
>> emerge from the pool of highly engaged users.  You want to foster
>> conversations which flow seemlessly from "how do I do this" to "how do I
>> implement this" to "welcome new committer so-and-so".  Breaking out a
>> separate
>> user@ list is not generally desirable until the project has hit critical
>> mass
>> and dev list traffic is high.
>>
>> Community growth is a difficult problem that is central to the Apache
>> mission,
>> and it will be an important challenge for the proposed Aurora podling
>>since
>> all the initial contributors work for the same company (Twitter).  It
>>will
>> be
>> tempting to make architectural decisions in private for the sake of
>> efficiency, but doing so will stunt the project's growth.  It's
>>important
>> to
>> hold project discussions out in the open where as many people as
>>possible
>> can
>> witness them and potentially jump in.
>>
>> The issues/notifications/ci list is a different story.  Making the dev
>> list a
>> good read with a high signal-to-noise ratio is a good recruitment
>>tactic.
>> There are often people who are interested in high-level development
>> conversations and user discussions but who get annoyed by CI spam and
>>issue
>> tracker trivialities.
>>
>> In my opinion, it would be fruitful to start off with just dev@,
>>private@and
>> commits@ lists; discuss adding a notifications@ list as one of the first
>> community decisions you make on your dev@ list; and perhaps add a
>>user@list
>> later when the time is ripe.  However, all of these decisions are
>> ultimately
>> up to the community; us Incubator denizens are just providing the best
>> guidance we can based on what seems to have worked in the past.
>>
>> Marvin Humphrey
>>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message