Hi JB!

> 1. We create a new mailing list: [email protected].
> 2. We configure github integration to send all pull request comments on 
> review mailing list. It would allow to track and simplify the way to read the 
> comments and to keep up to date.

I already have it organized that way through filters but having a
dedicated mailing list is a much better idea.

> 3. A technical discussion should be send on dev mailing list with the 
> [DISCUSS] keyword in the subject.
> 4. Once a discussion is open, the author should periodically send an update 
> on the discussion (once a week) >containing a summary of the last exchanges 
> happened on the Jira or github (quick and direct summary).

We can try that on a best-effort basis. Enforcing this seems to be
difficult and could also introduce verbosity on the mailing list.

> 5. Once we consider the discussion close (no update in the last two weeks), 
> the author send a [CLOSE] e-mail on the thread.

I think it is hard to decide when a discussion is closed. Two weeks
seems like a too short amount of time.

In general, +1 for an open development process.

-Max

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:05 AM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 except [4] for me, too. [4] may be replaced with linking DISCUSSION mail
> thread archive to JIRA.
> Yes it doesn't update news on discussion to JIRA and/or Github, but at
> least someone needed to see can find out manually.
>
> Thanks,
> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
>
> 2016년 10월 7일 (금) 오전 11:00, Satish Duggana <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>
>> +1 for proposal except for [4]. Agree with Raghu on [4] as it may be
>> burdensome to update with summaries and folks may start replying comments
>> on those summaries etc and conclusions are updated on respective design
>> docs. We may want to start without [4].
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Satish.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Raghu Angadi <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for [email protected]. Open lists are critically
>> > important.
>> >
>> > My comment earlier was mainly about (4). Sorry about the not being clear.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1 for supporting different working styles.
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Kenneth Knowles
>> <[email protected]
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > +1 to [email protected] if it is turnkey for infra to
>> > set
>> > > > up, aka points 1 and 2.
>> > > >
>> > > > Even though I would not personally read it via email, getting the
>> > > > information in yet another format and infrastructure (and
>> stewardship)
>> > is
>> > > > valuable for search, archival, and supporting diverse work styles.
>> The
>> > > > benefit might not be huge, but I think it will be enough to justify
>> the
>> > > > (hopefully negligible) cost.
>> > > >
>> > > > Kenn
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 4:54 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi team,
>> > > >
>> > > > following the discussion we had about technical discussion that
>> should
>> > > > happen on the mailing list, I would like to propose the following:
>> > > >
>> > > > 1. We create a new mailing list: [email protected].
>> > > > 2. We configure github integration to send all pull request comments
>> on
>> > > > review mailing list. It would allow to track and simplify the way to
>> > > > read the comments and to keep up to date.
>> > > > 3. A technical discussion should be send on dev mailing list with the
>> > > > [DISCUSS] keyword in the subject.
>> > > > 4. Once a discussion is open, the author should periodically send an
>> > > > update on the discussion (once a week) containing a summary of the
>> last
>> > > > exchanges happened on the Jira or github (quick and direct summary).
>> > > > 5. Once we consider the discussion close (no update in the last two
>> > > > weeks), the author send a [CLOSE] e-mail on the thread.
>> > > >
>> > > > WDYT ?
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards
>> > > > JB
>> > > > --
>> > > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> > > > [email protected]
>> > > > http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> > > > Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>

Reply via email to