qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Godfrey <rob.j.godf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication
Date Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:09:17 GMT
On 21 January 2013 12:43, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm happy enough with the idea of collapsing proton@ given that Protons
> scope is in some ways wider than when it started out (where the very
> specific protocol library made a good case for a separate list), but I
> don't think that list being separate is the main source of most of the
> confusion with proton. People have asked roughly the same basic questions
> about proton on users@ and proton@ at roughly the same time, which did
> indeed mean certain discussion with answers might have only gone to one of
> the lists at a time, but the key point for me was that they had to ask
> those basic questions on either list in the first place.
>
>
+1


> We are talking about improving communication, and for me the main problem
> is often that information isn't being written down or sent to any of the
> lists until someone asks a question requiring it. That question typically
> gets met with a [large] email explaining the answer, but much of the time
> it should be possible for the response to just be a link to somewhere the
> answer is already written down in general, e.g the website, with perhaps
> some context-specific additions. Some website update stats would probably
> entertaining right about now for example.
>
>
Completely agreed (and hands up to not personally having updated the
website in ages).


> I think users@ and dev@ should be left as is, and that we potentially just
> adjust how we use them slightly. These lists have existed for several
> years, and its the structure almost every Apache project works away just
> fine with; I don't think we are all that special in this regard. I also
> don't think we should subscribe everyone to a bunch of traffic they didn't
> sign up for. That said, this doesn't mean developers actually need to post
> discussion mails to dev@, the users@ list is always there and I know
> Gordon
> at least often posts only to that if it is a user related discussion, and I
> think that approach works well enough if others were to use it. The dev@
> list can continue at least to hold things like the JIRA traffic (I could
> see ReviewBoard postings going to either list), even if general discussion
> moves to the users@ list.
>
>
Personally I'd have JIRAs and ReviewBoards on dev and make sure everything
else was on users.  However I agree with your main point that it's not the
multitude of mailing lists that is necessarily the issue... it's the fact
that information isn't available *anywhere* :-)


> Summarising, I agree we need to be better at communicating, I think a bit
> of mailing list adjustment would be a good thing where proton@ could go
> and
> dev@ should stay in some guise, but that there are other problems with our
> communication that reducing the number of mailing lists potentially does
> little to solve.
>
>
Agreed,
Rob


> Robbie
>
>
> On 18 January 2013 17:21, Gordon Sim <gsim@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe that we have too many mailing lists and that we are missing out
> > on valuable collaboration and transparency as a result.
> >
> > Too often in the past topics have been discussed on the dev list without
> > reflecting any of the discussion back to the user list, keeping a large
> > part of the community in the dark. Now that we have a distinct list for
> > proton there is the possibility of yet more fragmentation.
> >
> > I honestly believe that we would be better off with just one list for
> > discussions. I think there will increasingly be issues that cross-cut
> > different components or that would benefit from wider participation. Not
> > all topics will be of interest to all subscribers, but that is always
> going
> > to be the case.
> >
> > It doesn't seem to me like any of the lists are so high in volume that
> > this would cause significant problems. More rigorous use of subject could
> > help people filter if needed. (JIRA and commit notices I think do warrant
> > their own lists allowing a lot of the 'noise' to be avoided if so
> desired).
> >
> > Any other thoughts on this? Does anyone have fears of being deluged with
> > unwanted emails?
> >
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.**org<
> users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message