jena-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paolo Castagna <>
Subject Re: Dont' fork the dev lists (Re: I wish to contribute a new tdb example)
Date Wed, 08 Dec 2010 15:49:22 GMT
Dave Reynolds wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 14:38 +0000, Paolo Castagna wrote: 
>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> On 07/12/10 10:00, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>> On 06/12/2010 23:09, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>>>> It's welcome. Send it to and see what the
>>>>> reaction is.
>>>> No - the corect dev list is now which is
>>>> where this proposal was sent.
>>>> During the changeover people might want to flag important messages on
>>>> the old list with instructions on how to join this one but do not fork
>>>> the conversations - it will damage your community.
>>> Ross -
>>> is the user list (it's name is historic - when 
>>> Jena was small there was only one list, and that became the one all the 
>>> user questions were on so).
>>> As we discussed, we'll migrate the user lists but it will be a slow 
>>> process during which we'll have two active lists for quite some time.
>> Why will it be a slow process?
> Because we have 3000 list members who will, or won't, switch in their
> own time. Plus hundreds of thousands of downloaded copies of Jena whose
> included documentation points to the existing yahoo-group. Not everyone
> uses the most recent version and tracks the details of what is going on,
> we will have people turning up at the yahoo group for a *long* time to
> come.

We can fix the documentation and clearly (and maybe in advance) communicate
the change, but other than this I don't see what else we can do.

>> What are the advantages in making it a slow process?
> ??

The process is slow because of reasons we cannot control.
But, depending on what we do, we can make it slower than what it could be.

>> Either we find a way to automate this (and it will be quick),
>> or we must tell the users to switch and it's up to them to
>> decide if they want to do it and when.
> We only have the latter option.
>> I would prefer the switch to be as quick as possible and not
>> have a time where we have two active lists. Of, if we have two
>> active list, in one (i.e. we should
>> just say something like: this is not the correct mailing list,
>> please, subscribe to, bla, bla.
> First, there would need to be a clear message to everyone when the
> switch will happen and give interested people enough time to subscribe.
> Second, for a long time after the official switch there will not only be
> new questions to the yahoo list but a large number of listeners who
> haven't yet moved. Are you advocating that from the instant of switch
> over we never answer another question on yahoo but always ask people to
> jump through another list registration hoop before getting an answer (or
> seeing the answer to some else's question)?


This would give a strong incentive to them to migrate. ;-)

Moreover, we should invite others people who reply to move themselves as well.

Sooner or later we want them to migrate, better sooner than later.

> That's not the sort of helpfulness we have previously striven for.

Same level of helpfulness will be achieved, only in a different/better (*)


  (*) public archives, search works via Google|third party websites, ...

> Dave

View raw message