1. You create an account.
2. You go to the CF repositories you want to keep updated on and click
on "Watch" in the top right corner.
3. You receive emails.
4. You either reply to those emails (github will automatically write the
comment on the site for you) or you click on the link in the email and
go to github and type your message their directly.
Some basic pros:
- With github, you can link to other issues and pull requests by using
a # symbol followed by the number of the issue/PR.
- You can mention other users and anyone who doesn't explicitly say
they don't want to get notifications, will get an email/notification
that they were mentioned (ex. @djhoese).
- You can use github markdown syntax to add URLs, format code/literal
blocks, shorten chunks of text/code (<detail> tag), add images, create
sections headers, bulleted lists, etc.
Dave
On 11/7/18 4:44 PM, Painter, Jeff wrote:
Someone (I forget who) told me that many of the people discussing
standard_names would not want to deal with the additional complexities
of Github.
*From: *Brian Eaton <[email protected]>
*Date: *Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 2:41 PM
*To: *"Painter, Jeff" <[email protected]>
*Cc: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
*Subject: *Re: Please stop sending Github messages to the ML
Erik,
> I don't have a view of the whole setup, so I may be missing some aspects
> that complicate this. But even then, it may be worth the effort.
The piece you're missing is that I'm trying to get Mailman support off of
my plate; not make it a more integral part of the system. The CF
conventions activities are supported at LLNL, not at NCAR. The original CF
website which I created at NCAR was moved to LLNL quite a few years ago,
but for reasons I've never understood it wasn't possible, at least at that
time, to support a Mailman server there. So it stayed at NCAR, and has
been stuck here ever since.
Again, I don't really see why moving all discussion to github wouldn't be
preferable to having discussions on both github and a Mailman list
(wherever that list might reside). But I'm not a github expert so don't
know whether there are drawbacks to having all the discussions there.
Brian
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 3:14 PM Painter, Jeff <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
It certainly is a hack! When we set up this two-list system long
ago, LLNL's lists were managed by Majordomo. No they are run by
LISTSERV. I don't know whether LISTSERV supports flexible topics
within the list.
On 11/7/18, 1:58 PM, "Erik Quaeghebeur"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Dear Brian,
> I don't believe that [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> is a mailman list. The
> cf-metadata mailman list (which I administer at NCAR) is
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.
The LLNL server is the one that gets the github
> notifications and sends them to *mostly* the same people who
are members of
> the mailman list. I say mostly because the membership in
these lists is
> synchronized by hand. When people sign up or remove
themselves from the
> mailman list, I send this information to Jeff Painter who
then makes the
> changes at LLNL. We originally set things up like this so
that people
> didn't need to sign up in two places to follow the
discussions that were
> happening on the mailman list and on the trac server at
LLNL. As github
> has replaced trac the current system was set up.
I understand the logic, but this sounds like a hack. It seems
this can be
dealt with as follows:
* You as cf-metadata admin creates topics as needed
* LLNL list traffic is sent to the cf-metadata list using one
or more
specific topic that people can (un)subscribe (from) to.
It seems to me such an approach would have multiple advantages:
* No need to (manually) sync users
* Users are in control of selecting topics
* Reverse traffic is likely possible by users sending mail to the
appropriate topic (how exactly this works, I don't know, but it
would
surprise me if this were not possible)
I don't have a view of the whole setup, so I may be missing
some aspects
that complicate this. But even then, it may be worth the effort.
Best,
Erik
