Do you think PR comments are relevant discussions? Again, what is the allowance/guidance from the ASF for them, now that Github is officially approved/advised.
I suggest it's worth raising to the larger ASF community for comment and adaptation. On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Sebastian <[email protected]> wrote: > The ASF mandates that all relevant discussions happen on the mailinglist. > > Best, > Sebastian > > > On 18.06.2015 10:44, Andrew Musselman wrote: > >> What do you mean no-go, that there's no reasonable way to incorporate >> discussion from other channels to the list? >> >> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Sebastian <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Having these discussions in a non-public environment prevents all >>> non-invited people (e.g. all non-committers) from participating in the >>> development. I think this is a huge no-go. >>> >>> Best, >>> Sebastian >>> >>> >>> On 18.06.2015 09:43, Ted Dunning wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Andrew Musselman < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Capturing discussion in a public format and archiving the discussion >>>> >>>>> would >>>>> be preferable to fragmenting across lists, PR comments, and Slack, but >>>>> the >>>>> tools are all valuable, and until we find a way to build a digest for >>>>> the >>>>> archives I support using them all. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Actually, capturing the design discussion on the list is not just >>>> preferable. >>>> >>>> It is required. >>>> >>>> Using alternative tools is fine and all, but not if it compromises that >>>> core requirement. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>
