Lol, I am in agreement with you Rohit! I just don't see in the list a CLEAR answer to this thread.
>-----Original Message----- >From: rohityada...@gmail.com [mailto:rohityada...@gmail.com] On Behalf >Of Rohit Yadav >Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 4:17 PM >To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Email etiquette CC or not CC > >On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:11 PM, <kdam...@apache.org> wrote: >>> Can we get a firm answer if we are go for abusing the reply-all button now? >> >> +1 on abusing reply-all button. > >+1 i.e. to say fix your email client and not the ML. > >> >> --Sheng >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> -kd >>> >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org] >>>>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 3:44 PM >>>>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Email etiquette CC or not CC >>>> >>>>On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Rohit Yadav <bhais...@apache.org> >wrote: >>>>>>>> Even if we adopt ccing, it is a convention to get a more >>>>>>>> efficient >>> traffic >>>>flow. It is not a must. It is your responsibility to adopt the >>> conventions that >>>>have evolved on the list to make the list more efficient such as >>>>tagged >>> topics >>>>and ccing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What's the follow up? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think we agree to try adapt CC style? >>>>> >>>>> I think so, I see few emails with CCs in them. Send emails with CC >>>>> to respective person boldly, and let them configure their email >>>>> client so the email does not show up as two emails in their inbox. >>>> >>>>One thing need to be done from manager of the mailing list. Currently >>>>the mailing list automatically remove all the CC/TO except mailing >>>>list address >>> itself >>>>when sending out the mails, and no way to get people CCed >>>>automatically after that. >>>> >>>>And with CC, the most important thing to remember is: Reply All. It >>>>would >>> be a >>>>common mistakes when we start trying it, but I am sure we would be >>>>used to it soon. >>>> >>>>--Sheng >>>>> >>>>> Regards. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I meant try to adopt CC style. >>>>>> >>>>>> --Sheng >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --Sheng >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --Alex >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org] >>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:01 PM >>>>>>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Email etiquette CC or not CC >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Chip Childers >>>>>>>>> <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Edison Su >>>>>>>>> > <edison...@citrix.com> >>>>wrote: >>>>>>>>> >> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >> I am struggling to read all the emails on dev list >>>>>>>>> >> everyday, it's just so >>>>>>>>> many emails. Is it possible, that enable/allow/encourage us CC >>>>>>>>> to somebody if you think the topic he/she should take a look >>>>>>>>> at? I think it will save both of us a lot of time. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Edison, >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > I'm fine with CC'ing someone specific when I know that I need >>>>>>>>> > their attention, but two caveats that I'm worried about are: >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > 1 - I find myself often needing the whole community's >>>>>>>>> > attention, for VOTE threads or release planning updates, >>>>>>>>> > etc... I struggle to understand how folks want to see this. >>>>>>>>> > I thought that VOTE and ACS41 would be sufficient headers for >>>>>>>>> > people to actually pay attention to, but it appears to not be >working. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I believe the header should be sufficient in the most case, and >>>>>>>>> that's exactly what's mostly other community did. But as you >>>>>>>>> feel that it's not working well, that's probably means, people >>>>>>>>> are lazy, in nature(though I think it's may be improved with >>>>>>>>> CC'ing someone directly, but this should not be an issue even >>>>>>>>> with our current mailing list policy). >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > 2 - If someone starts a thread, I would expect that they >>>>>>>>> > would actually pay attention to that thread! I've seen times >>>>>>>>> > when people start a thread, but don't respond to queries from >>>>>>>>> > others in the community. This is especially vexing when the >>>>>>>>> > thread is about a work that's in progress. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That's exactly what we want to address. People are not intently >>>>>>>>> drop the thread, most of time, they just forgot. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If you start e.g. 5 threads in a day, you maybe miss one or two >>>>>>>>> of them in the next day. Or you start a thread one week ago but >>>>>>>>> only got response 1 week later, you also may be miss it >>>>>>>>> completely. And I personally feel even I am intently to find >>>>>>>>> back my thread, it would take 10s even 30s to find my thread - >>>>>>>>> it's very possible I missed it when skim for the first time, >>>>>>>>> then realize where is that thread? Then check back again(that's >>>>>>>>> what's happened to me this morning). That's very annoying. I >>>>>>>>> suppose we would deal with the mailing list based on a >>>>>>>>> priority, even we would skim them all. Of course on the top of >>>>>>>>> priority list is the threads I involved. But I cannot tell >>>>>>>>> which one it is with a glimpse in tens even hundreds of mails. >>>>>>>>> What's we want, is we can pay attention to our threads >>> easily. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> LKML received hundreds of mail every day, I cannot image how >>>>>>>>> can Linus Torvalds or Andrew Morton survive if the mail is only >>>>>>>>> sent to mailing list, and they have to go through all the mails >>>>>>>>> to find out which one got their attention yesterday(though I >>>>>>>>> also believe they got tons of CC or TO mails as well). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --Sheng >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Thoughts? >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > -chip >>>
