Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest
specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested
email address of [email protected]?
Robbie
On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]>
wrote:
I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?
Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.
If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
things to use it.
Robbie
On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <
[email protected]> wrote:
Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
[email protected]> wrote:
Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear
period
to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days,
but
discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion
suggests
otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really
properly
discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was
the
terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on
PRs
belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the
JIRA
traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say
that
makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
list.
If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we
should
actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra
to
hold off moving things while we do so.
I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine
where
they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same
applies in
reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into
the
same place they were going originally.
Robbie
On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <
[email protected]> wrote:
I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
messages to the commit message.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
<[email protected]> wrote:
Don’t get me wrong. I can do with filters personally.
I just think this could be more friendly for new people
joining in. Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone
just joining)
What about this. We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages
to a new list.
I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <
[email protected]> wrote:
I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than
adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions,
it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy
smartphone.
-------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
[email protected]> Date: 15/02/2019 22:39 (GMT+00:00) To:
[email protected] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github
messages on a separate list The thing is. I can do fine with filtering.
So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am
putting myself in the shoes of someone coming on board now. Justtrying to
make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher
Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:> I am +0 on this
because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters
on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic
right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels
setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with
one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.
I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15,
2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> >> wrote:>>
People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> >
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[email protected]>
wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to
contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think
that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > >
requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> >
about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >>
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > >
[email protected]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev
list on my daily basis. We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing
this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out
stuff with filters. Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to
recruit new open source devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who
only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.>
Github is easy enough to follow. So I propose we move GitHub>
comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could
leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > >
as the web site. Architectural decisions. Releases. And eventually> >
even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > >
Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> >
Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
--
Clebert Suconic
--
Clebert Suconic
--
Clebert Suconic
