Thanks, I hear the concerns and it's not my intention to push people off
the list. On the other hand, I think github discussions are no more
"artificial" than discussions on dev list, and the good and important
discussions warrant the same amount of attention. With this vote, I intend
to make contributors' life easier by decoupling the recognized forum from
the technology they use, and that github contributors can easily
communicate with the community on the list.

-sz

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 9:05 AM, Barber, Christopher <
christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote:

> Can't you simply tell contributors to discuss changes on dev before
> submitting a PR? Since the contribution guidelines don't tell developers to
> post to dev, why would you expect them to do that?
>
> Is there an easy way to just subscribe to PR notifications or will someone
> have to write a filter to avoid spamming dev with all GitHub notifications?
> I think that if dev gets too much traffic, then people with casual interest
> may find it easier to unsubscribe than to set up filters. Once someone
> unsubscribes, they probably won't be coming back soon, so you should be
> very careful with this.
>
> I don't see why artificially increasing the traffic on dev will do
> anything to grow the community in any case.
>
> - C
>
> On 7/18/18, 11:17 AM, "Indhu" <indhubhara...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     Some mentors/contributors/committees feel that the amount of
> discussions in
>     dev list is too less given the amount of commits that happen and more
>     discussions need to happen in the dev list to grow the community.
>
>     In response some committees feel discussions actually happen in GitHub
> PRs.
>     If the policy says "if it didn't happen in dev, it didn't happen",
> let's
>     forward all GitHub discussions to dev so those discussions would count.
>     That's the motivation for this vote.
>
>     I think when people say there needs to be more discussions in the dev
> list,
>     I assume they mean the kind of discussions that happen *before* a PR is
>     created or even before someone starts working on anything. I don't
> think
>     people are asking an email for every activity on GitHub. The correct
> way to
>     address the problem would be for committees/contributors to stop
>     communicating in private channels (like Amazon or DMLC communication
>     channels) and do those discussions in the dev list instead.
>
>     Indu
>
>
>     On Wed, Jul 18, 2018, 5:51 AM Barber, Christopher <
>     christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote:
>
>     > Can't people already subscribe to github notifications? I think it
> is safe
>     > to assume that developers are already smart enough to figure out how
> to do
>     > that if they want. What problem are you really trying to solve here?
>     >
>     > On 7/18/18, 4:49 AM, "Chris Olivier" <cjolivie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>     >
>     >     -1.  (changed from -0.9)
>     >
>     >     seems more like a strategy (whether intentional or on accident)
> to
>     > *not*
>     >     have design discussions on dev by flooding it with noise and
> then later
>     >     claim it was discussed, even though you would have to sift
> through
>     >     thousands of emails to find it.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >     On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:42 AM Rahul Huilgol <
> rahulhuil...@gmail.com
>     > >
>     >     wrote:
>     >
>     >     > I pulled up some more stats so we can make an informed
> decision.
>     >     >
>     >     > Here are some popular Apache projects and the number of emails
> to
>     > their
>     >     > dev@
>     >     > list in the last 30 days
>     >     > Apache Flink: 540 mails
>     >     > ​Apache Spark: 249 mails
>     >     > Apache Hive: 481 mails
>     >     > Apache HBase: 300 mails
>     >     >
>     >     > Current dev list for MXNet: 348 mails
>     >     > Current commits list for MXNet: 5329 mails
>     >     > Making the proposed dev list for MXNet to be ~5677 mails.
>     >     >
>     >     > Sheng, even going by your comments that 1 of of those 4 mails
> are
>     > relevant
>     >     > for dev@, that's still a really high number of emails. (130
> email
>     > lists
>     >     > doesn't say anything if we ignore the actual number of emails
> in
>     > those
>     >     > lists, especially when the 131st sends these many mails :) ).
> People
>     > are
>     >     > already talking about setting up filters here. Doesn't that
> defeat
>     > the
>     >     > purpose by making people filter out the discussion on Github?
> People
>     > can
>     >     > subscribe to commits@ if they find it more convenient to
> follow
>     > Github
>     >     > activity over email rather than Github.com.
>     >     >
>     >     > We should strive to maintain dev@ as a place for high quality
>     > discussion.
>     >     > It's upto the contributors to bring up something to dev@ if
> they
>     > believe
>     >     > it
>     >     > deserves a focused discussion in the community. That
> discussion may
>     > be
>     >     > started by the person who proposes code changes, or a reviewer
> who
>     > believes
>     >     > that a particular code change warrants further discussion.
>     >     >
>     >     > Regards,
>     >     > Rahul
>     >     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>
>
>

Reply via email to