I'd be in favor of using issues@, and only create reviews@ if folks complain it's still not good enough.
J-D On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> wrote: > We discussed this a month or two ago but I've been delinquent in pushing > this forward. We all seemed to agree that it would be good to move the > gerrit traffic off of dev@ so that the list is easier to subscribe to and > follow for newcomers who might not be interested in every revision of every > patch in flight (100+ emails/week). But, we didn't quite settle where to > move it *to*. > > There were two options: > > 1) use the existing issues@ list > 2) use a new reviews@ list > > My preference is towards using issues@ because oftentimes when someone is > fixing a bug or making a small improvement, they don't necessarily create a > new JIRA. So, I'm not sure why someone would want to subscribe to just JIRA > but not gerrit (or vice versa). Given that Gerrit already provides an easy > filtering mechanism (eg 'kudu-cr' in the subject line) people can always > separate them back out. > > Adar mentioned that he prefers reviews@ to be more 'consistent', though > I'll let him pipe up with his rationale. > > I don't think we need a formal vote, but opinions solicited! Would be great > to wrap this up this week so we can report the progress back on our > upcoming podling report. > > -Todd >
