-0.9 Do any other Apache projects do this? Seems really odd. Jira was posting to dev for maybe 3 days and people were complaining like crazy about the noise, and that was just a few tickets. Now we’re talking about possibly hundreds of emails per day. ALL PR comments, commit notificatios, issue movement, tagging, etc.
It’s hard to imagine how this would be useful. Also, does this also mean that claiming that anything said or done in github “was discusssd on dev”? -C On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:24 PM Sheng Zha <szha....@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, Rahul. Out of the 4 conversations you listed that you think are not > necessary, I actually think the PR on coreml tool may be worth discussing. > For example, should it (and other tools) have a separate repo, and should > its version management be tied to mxnet. > > And on: > > > If people are forced to setup filters to parse these mails, then we are > *ensuring* > people don't get their eyes on valuable discussions on dev@. > > I think this argument is based more on emotion than on reason. I subscribe > to over 130 email lists for work, lots of which has PR/commit updates that > are not my immediate concern, and it hasn't prevented me from reading > valuable discussions. > > -sz > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Rahul Huilgol <rahulhuil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > -1 > > > > We had such a thing before and people asked for the mails to be > redirected > > to a different list commits@ because of the flood of mails. > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8b834e39110381fadb8a0ab59185a8 > > f52b8406247a1f281f7d691392@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E > > > > I don't know if people have a sense of the volume of mails this can add > > here. Here's the stats from the commits@ email list we have. I'd be > > curious > > to see how many subscribers we have to that. Hopefully the people voting > +1 > > here subscribed to that :) > > > > 2018 June: 4617 > > 2018 July: (half a month) 3106 > > (Source of the numbers are here > > https://lists.apache.org/list.html?comm...@mxnet.apache.org:2018-7) > > > > @Joshua: yes we need to bring 'valuable' (emphasis mine) discussion to a > > centralized place @dev. Does everything needs to be sent to dev@. For > > example, consider these recent PRs, why is it necessary for them to be > > forwarded to dev@? > > > > fix flaky test test_operator_gpu.test_countsketch: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11780 > > Update PyPI version number: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11773 > > Fix file name creation for Windows: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11765 > > [MXNET-8230] test_operator_gpu.test_rms fails: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11749 > > > > If people are forced to setup filters to parse these mails, then we are > > *ensuring* people don't get their eyes on valuable discussions on dev@. > > > > Regards, > > Rahul > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:49 PM, Sheng Zha <szha....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > FWIW: "from:notificati...@github.com AND > to:dev@mxnet.incubator.apache. > > org > > > AND NOT to:me" but I'm sure you get the gist :) > > > > > > > > > Opt-in model applies to individuals rather than the dev list, because > the > > > dev list is intended as an asynchronous way for new comers to easily > > follow > > > past technical discussions, and is the only place recognized by apache > > for > > > these discussions. Currently, lots of high quality technical > discussions > > > that are happening on github are lost and not archived here. The > > procedural > > > change in this vote is intended for bridging such gap. Besides, it's > more > > > likely for new contributors to know how to filter emails than to know > how > > > to "opt-in". > > > > > > > > > More discussion is welcome in the linked discussion thread. > > > > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:37 PM, pracheer gupta < > > > pracheer_gu...@hotmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > FWIW: The filter needs to be more complicated than just " > > > > from:notificati...@github.com". After all, if someone mentions me > > > > directly in PR thread and/or I subscribe to only a particular PR, > those > > > > emails will also come from "notificati...@github.com". There are > ways > > > > around that though. > > > > > > > > > > > > It might be good to mention this filter in some wiki/webpage > somewhere; > > > > may save some effort for people trying to find the right set of > > filters. > > > It > > > > could even be in the welcome email when one subscribes to this > > > email-list. > > > > > > > > > > > > Another alternate option: How about choosing an opt-in model rather > > than > > > > an opt-out model? Having another email list and anyone can subscribe > to > > > it > > > > if they wish. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure if there is a perfect answer out there for this but in > > principle > > > > I agree that it will be good to have "push notifications" for all > > > PRs/issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Pracheer > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Junru Shao <junrushao1...@gmail.com> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 10:58:33 AM > > > > To: d...@mxnet.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Subscribe dev@ to Github Activities > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Both GitHub activities and dev list are places for development. It > will > > > be > > > > great if we could have a all-in-one place for such discussions. I > > believe > > > > Sheng's proposal is a perfect solution. > > > > > > > > On 2018/07/16 03:32:06, Sheng Zha <szha....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I'm starting a vote on subscribing dev@ to Github activities. See > > > > previous > > > > > discussion thread here > > > > > < > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3d883f6a3cbc8e81e810962e0c0fe7 > > > > bfd01f0b78d3cb44034f566442@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E> > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > The vote lasts for three days and ends on 7/18/2018 at 9pm pst. > > > > > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Rahul Huilgol > > >
