I'm similarly an infrequent/casual contributor to BuildStream and don't have a strong preference either way on this, +0 for IRC and -0 to Slack on a personal preference level.
I will say though that if Slack is chosen as the way forward, I'd much prefer it if we used the BuildTeamWorld workspace (where BuildBox and various remote execution servers already live) than creating a BuildStream-specific Slack workspace. This is mostly a selfish request as I already have two Slack workspaces open simultaneously and don't really want to add a third. I tend to find it easier to join an IRC channel than a Slack workspace, though that that is likely due to familiarity and the fact I already have a client configured usefully than any UX advantages. Its probably also worth noting that it is significantly cheaper to set up an IRC bot to save channel history to a publicly visible place than to pay for Slack's unlimited history option. I agree that the main goal here should be to select the option which includes as many people as possible, which is the main reason for me not expressing a strong preference towards IRC (since that is clearly less accessible for a section of the community). Adam On Fri, 2020-07-10 at 10:23 -0400, Ed Baunton wrote: > I would agree with the points that Ben raises, +1 to Slack. > > As a casual and infrequent contributor to BuildStream I find Slack > much easier and friendlier to handle and passively be a member of. No > need to setup (and pay for...) BNCs and the like to be able to review > history; more friendly user profiles with avatars and richer markdown. > > I do agree that the invite process for slack is more convoluted than > it should be, but setting up an IRC client correctly with SSL, > nickservs, BNCs etc. isn't exactly a point and click operation either. > In addition to that it is often impossible to configure a decent IRC > client behind a corporate firewall, which would exclude a portion of > our population. I think one of the goals for selecting this > communication channel should be to be able to include as many people > as possible, whatever their skill level and background. > > I haven't used IRC since 2010 so maybe some of the above has moved on. > In my mind low barriers to entry are the biggest reason Slack has > worked well for me. > > Ed > > On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 06:32, Benjamin Schubert <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hey, > > > > TLDR: slack +1, IRC -0 > > > > My reasoning: > > > > Slack is commonly and easily available from the web, an > > android/iphone/ubuntu touch app, desktop apps and such. > > > > It is much easier for anyone to use, with configurable notifications across > > all devices, silent notifications > > during certain hours etc. Basically it is much harder to miss something > > important coming > > from slack than coming from IRC. > > > > Most of the 'build' related projects are also on slack. > > > > > > IRC: > > > > IRC is a pain to keep synced with settings accross multiple devices. Some > > third party > > systems exist to do that for you but are either paying, or limited in > > capabilities, > > (Not to see regularly down). > > > > > > Ben > > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > > On Friday, 10 July 2020 10:20, Tristan Daniël Maat < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > Just a quick +1 to IRC, -1 to Slack. My reasoning is based on my > > > > experience > > > > with the build team slack, which I found difficult to join due to the > > > > only > > > > ingress > > > > > > My two cents, I also found this more difficult than necessary. > > > > > > > competent users than I may have an easier time of it. > > > > > > Though I doubt it's that, I simply think Slack isn't designed with > > > public chats in mind. An "invite" shouldn't be necessary, and a link > > > to it shouldn't expire. > > > > > > I'd also oppose a suggestion to use Discord for the same reasons, > > > which has unfortunately also been gaining traction in open source > > > projects... > > > > > > Since this has been a very one-sided conversation so far, I wonder > > > what the advantages of switching to Slack would be. Is this simply > > > being suggested because we want a pretty chat client, or is there more > > > to it? > > > > > > Some of the benefits would include better moderation capabilities, I > > > believe, but I don't currently see a need for that. > > > > > > The suggestion to use Slack might be more welcome if current > > > contributors aren't simply asked if they want to switch with no > > > apparent benefits ;) > > > > > > Tristan Maat
