couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joan Touzet <>
Subject Re: moving email lists to GitHub Discussions (Was: [DISCUSS] moving email lists to Discourse)
Date Tue, 26 May 2020 17:56:21 GMT
Quick update for those who don't want to read JIRA (you can subscribe to 
the issue, by the way - could use more voices...):

Because the request is to put user support discussions there only for 
now, we aren't strictly required to have email integration with our 
users@ list. That's good!

The bad news is that GitHub Repo Discussions are still in limited beta, 
and we need someone at GH to enable that for our repo.

I have asked Infra to reach out to GH to ask about this, but have zero 
visibility into progress on that.

If I don't see any progress in a week or two, I'll poke them again.

The _good_ news is that if we felt we wanted to move forward with an 
alternative solution - again for user help only, no product decision 
making allowed outside of dev@ / something that cc's to dev@ - we could 
do that. But let's not be too hasty, GH Repo Discussions looks like the 
best match for us and the least long-term maintenance work.

-Joan "less admin == more maintainable" Touzet

On 2020-05-26 10:52, Nick Vatamaniuc wrote:
> +1
> Thank you, Joan!
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 2:50 PM Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:
>> Thanks Joan, I’m looking forward to Infra feedback.
>> Best
>> Jan
>> —
>>> On 22. May 2020, at 19:31, Joan Touzet <> wrote:
>>> I haven't gotten a lot of feedback on this proposal. (I know a lot of people
are marching towards deadlines right now.) I also don't want to take it to users@, unless
there's a reality of it happening.
>>> In the interest of moving this forward, I'm going to open an exploratory issue
with Infra to see how much work it'd be to make this happen. Hopefully, we're not the first
people to ask.
>>> We'll still need a vote here, or on users@, before we would actually move activity
to GH Discussions, but it won't be the gating factor for a while yet, I bet.
>>> FYI, per our project guidelines/bylaws, this would be a non-technical decision,
allowing for lazy consensus and a lazy majority (3 binding +1s, more binding +1s than binding
-1s), with binding votes cast by committers, and no vetos.
>>> -Joan
>>> On 2020-05-12 14:41, Joan Touzet wrote:
>>>> On 2020-05-12 5:46 a.m., Ilya Khlopotov wrote:
>>>>> I would be +1 as long as it works and we have options to migrate archive
elsewhere if/when we need to.
>>>>> You are proposing to mirror email traffic which means that mail archive
would have a complete history and spare the project from total vendor lock in.
>>>> Yup, that'd be a requirement from the ASF's perspective, regardless of technology
we select.
>>>> -Joan
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> ILYA
>>>>> On 2020/05/11 19:04:53, Joan Touzet <> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2020-03-15 9:36, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 13 Mar 2020, at 14:35, Naomi Slater wrote:
>>>>>>>> apparently GitHub has discussions now. it's still in beta,
but you can
>>>>>>>> specifically request it if you want it if you contact support,
I think
>>>>>>>> e.g.,
>>>>>>>> <>
>>>>>>> interesting.
>>>>>>>> I'm interested to know what we think about this and how this
>>>>>>>> might/could fit into our plans for user support, discussion,
>>>>>> Given that we already have email integration with GitHub, this will
>>>>>> probably be easier to get through the ASF bureaucracy than something
>>>>>> brand new.
>>>>>> I'm willing to take this through Infra if people agree to it. It
>>>>>> look like there are any separate "boards" or tags yet, so the proposal
>>>>>> would likely be that discussions there would get emailed onto user@.
>>>>>> hard part will be getting replies to the thread on user@ to go back
>>>>>> the discussion on GH; we might be able to get an "asf-bot" to do
>>>>>> for us.
>>>>>> I also looked at Infra's JIRA database, and no one has put in this
>>>>>> request there yet. So, we'd be the first, with all the difficulties
>>>>>> entails.
>>>>>> Can I get an informal "vote" on this approach and go-ahead? Since
>>>>>> informal, anyone is encouraged to respond.
>>>>>> -Joan "adopt, adapt, improve" Touzet

View raw message