qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: summary/conclusion (was Re: mailing lists and fragmented communication)
Date Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:31:59 GMT
In what sense are we special in our user/developer distinction? I can't
really think of anything to particularly support that.

In terms of JIRA traffic going to dev, actually I consider it detrimental
that everyone filters JIRAs off and never bothers to actually look at JIRA.
Patches continually sit on JIRAs for weeks/months/years before anyone picks
them up (e.g when I send out an email moaning about how many hundred open
JIRAs we have, or how many open JIRAs are assigned to already-released
versions, at a particular point in time) as so many people clearly never
bother looking at JIRA. That said, I do agree that such traffic shouldnt go
to the same mailing list we inteded as the primary non-JIRA path for users
to be posting discussion on, so I guess that nullifies the issue (no pun
intended) if we were to do away with dev@.

If we were to make a new general discussion list (replacing users@ and
adding ddeelopment discussion) then discuss@ seems reasonable to me, but I
think the other things are served equally well by whats already here now. I
seem to recall picking notifications@ for the Jenkins emails because I read
previous mailing lsit creation requests where infra had pushed back on
other projects wanting myothername@ for their lists to be used for the same


On 21 January 2013 16:04, Justin Ross <jross@apache.org> wrote:

> For me, Gordon's stated summary is the best argument for one
> discussion list.  The users/dev split is conventional, but it is not
> particularly good for our project.  For one, the user/developer
> distinction is fuzzier for us than it is for many other projects.  For
> two, the kind of content that Gordon has been posting (and will
> continue posting) to users is more conventionally posted to dev lists
> in other projects.  I consider that a bad situation, because folks
> seeking, for instance, technical roadmap info could easily end up
> missing it because they're on the dev list, not the users list.
> Generally speaking, I think it's useful to introduce distinct lists
> (for users/dev and for components like proton) only if there is too
> much volume.  I don't think we're there yet.
> Finally, forgetting all this, the *first* thing I would change is jira
> traffic going to dev.  I consider it strictly detrimental.
> My dream scheme:
>   discussion@qpid.apache.org - human beings talking about qpid
>   commits@qpid.apache.org - [no change]
>   issues@qpid.apache.org - all jira traffic
>   tests@qpid.apache.org - all jenkins and other automated test traffic
> Thanks for hearing me out!
> Justin
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Gordon Sim <gsim@redhat.com> wrote:
> > I'm going to suggest that we leave all the lists in place for now, and
> leave
> > the choice of list to individual discretion.
> >
> > For my part however I will be focusing on the user list, which I see as a
> > community wide list for anyone with an interest at AMQP related software
> at
> > Apache. I would encourage people to only use other lists if they are
> > convinced this is too wide an audience for their thread.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org

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