I think we can be pragmatic: 1. When we have questions/help request, and we think it’s a good question/comment, we should both populate the doc and send a message to the dev@ mailing for the rationale. For instance, you might have see several tickets I created resulting to discussions with new users. Often our documentation can be improved and also our packages to provide a better onboarding experience. 2. Fragmentation is a valid comment. User@ should be a plus, not confusion for users. I don’t think we have too much mix between users and devs on the dev@ today (the discussion is coming more from user messages on Slack). So I don’t expect burden.
Regarding Slack, I have to check but AFAIR we changed the invitation pattern. Let me gather this for a separate discussion. I propose to pause for now on the user@ discussion and encourage users (especially on Slack) to use dev@ when it makes sense (using ASF Slack, it’s possible to digest slack messages to the mailing list periodically). If we clearly have traffic from both user and dev on dev@ then it will time to discuss creating user@. For instance, Arrow has both dev and user mailing lists: the traffic on the user mailing list is clearly low (dev is mostly used). So let’s be concrete: suggest the use of dev@ and digest user questions on dev@, it will give us good metric to see when we will consider user@. Thoughts ? Regards JB Le mar. 30 sept. 2025 à 18:48, Yufei Gu <[email protected]> a écrit : > Last time I checked, ASF slack workspace only allows people with asf email > addresses to join, is that rule still valid? But I agreed that we > should have a separate thread for Slack. > > To be clear, I'm totally fine with a user mail list, my only concern is the > fragmentation of the community. In a world with so many options, providing > less options could make both developers and users life a bit easier. And we > can always create one once we get enough users, which is a good problem to > have. With that, I'm -0 on it. Feel free to go ahead with it. > > Yufei > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 7:14 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > Leveraging existing ASF slack services / workspace makes sense to me. > > > > I agree that the users ML discussion is a separate concern. > > > > Cheers, > > Dmitri. > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 1:56 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi > > > > > > I would propose to join The ASF Slack workspace: I don't see the login > > > as an issue, and we would benefit to pro plan for free (with Apache > > > services integration). > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > That said, Slack and the user mailing list are different discussions > > imho. > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 10:47 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Searchability and the 90-day message retention limit on Slack are > valid > > > > concerns. That said, Slack really shines for quick, real-time > > > discussions, > > > > something email doesn't handle as well. > > > > > > > > To address the retention issue, one option could be securing > > sponsorships > > > > to upgrade to Slack Pro. I don’t think that would be too difficult, > > > > especially since there have already been some offline conversations > > > around > > > > this. > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 8:23 AM Adam Christian < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Howdy folks, > > > > > > > > > > Good discussion! > > > > > > > > > > I believe the User ML is a good idea. Here are my two thoughts on > > why: > > > > > > > > > > First: *Personas:* > > > > > In regards to Eric's comment about the difference between "users" > and > > > > > "dev"s, I like to think of Polaris serving 3 different personas: > > > > > 1. *Service Providers / Vendors: *These are users who use Polaris > as > > > the > > > > > basis for a separate service that is packaged and sold to other > > users. > > > I > > > > > believe that this is the majority of users engaged about 3ish > months > > > ago > > > > > based on anecdotal evidence. > > > > > 2. *Contributors:* These are the folks who build Polaris. I see > that > > > there > > > > > is a lot of overlap between contributors and service providers. > Given > > > that > > > > > overlap, I agree that Service Providers and Contributors will > > probably > > > stay > > > > > on the dev ML. > > > > > 3. *End Users:* These are folks that use Polaris's binaries but > never > > > > > interact at a code-level. I believe that these are the folks that a > > > User ML > > > > > would be good for. They can be engaged in the community but do not > > > have to > > > > > understand all of the nitty-gritty of the code. > > > > > > > > > > Second: *Searchability:* > > > > > I think that it's important for the "end user" persona to have > > > > > searchability. We are at an early stage of Polaris and not > everything > > > is > > > > > going to be a smooth user experience, so folks need to be able to > > > search > > > > > for their issues and see the answers. I agree that, right now, we > do > > a > > > lot > > > > > of this on Slack. However, I believe our Slack configuration does > not > > > store > > > > > conversations older than 90 days. This makes it more difficult for > > > adoption > > > > > in my opinion. For example, I have seen a lot of the same sorts of > > > MinIO > > > > > configuration questions in the past few weeks. Now, we could change > > our > > > > > Slack configuration and that might alleviate some of this concern > and > > > that > > > > > might not be such a big lift, but I think that a User ML is cheaper > > > and, to > > > > > Alex's point, it's more aligned with "if it didn't happen on the ML > > it > > > > > never happened" philosophy. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 9:55 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > I have the same experience about Slack: it's great for quick > > > > > > discussions and help, but it's not "stored", so it's not a > reusable > > > > > > resource (more one shot). > > > > > > The purpose of the mailing list (dev or user or ...) is to be > > public, > > > > > > archive, searchable. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Apache Arrow is a good example of the user/dev mailing > list > > > > > > usage. As said before: > > > > > > - dev mailing list is used by contributor/committer to discuss > > Arrow > > > > > > internals/roadmap. Also "integrators" can ask questions here. > > > > > > - user mailing list is used to get GitHub Discussion and Q&A > > > > > > > > > > > > That was also part of the proposal: also "bridge" the GitHub > > > > > > Discussions with the user mailing list. > > > > > > > > > > > > As we have more and more users on Polaris, as part of our "smooth > > > > > > onboarding" effort, I just wanted to start the discussion, at > least > > > to > > > > > > have it in mind, and consider later. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 2:27 PM Alexandre Dutra < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm a bit late to the party, sorry, but wanted to say that I > > > support > > > > > > > the proposal for a user mailing list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the Slack vs ML topic: I know this is highly subjective, > but I > > > > > > > personally have way too many Slack workspaces and I find it > > > difficult > > > > > > > to keep track of what's happening in all of them, often missing > > > > > > > important updates. Mailing lists, OTOH, allow me to consolidate > > all > > > > > > > messages into a single inbox, facilitating triage and > filtering. > > > > > > > Combined with Gmail's "snooze" feature, this workflow is the > best > > > I've > > > > > > > ever had. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the distinction between user and developer mailing lists: > this > > > > > > > distinction is common in other Apache communities. Generally, > > user > > > > > > > lists focus on configuration and deployment questions, while > > > developer > > > > > > > lists delve into code-related discussions. While some overlap > is > > > > > > > inevitable, it's not a significant concern imho. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, the Apache philosophy of "if it didn't happen on > the > > > ML > > > > > > > it never happened" highlights the importance of mailing lists > for > > > > > > > official communications, making Slack more suitable for > informal > > > > > > > discussions or one-on-one interactions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, just my 2 cents. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 27, 2025 at 6:12 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see your point. The idea is more to focus on discussions > > > purposes. > > > > > > > > Everything about "code" (including I create my own metastore, > > > etc) > > > > > can > > > > > > > > go in dev. > > > > > > > > The user should be more for questions/help on the polaris > > default > > > > > > > > core. Concretely, it's the questions we have today on Slack > > > (like, > > > > > how > > > > > > > > to use polaris cli, what's the purpose of this configuration, > > > etc). > > > > > > > > It would be a way to directly find questions and answers, as > a > > > "user > > > > > > resources". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But ok fair, we will see later about the user list. For now, > > > it's up > > > > > > > > to the contributor and user to create their own filters in > > their > > > mail > > > > > > > > client to "classify" the discussions (else, they will have a > > lot > > > of > > > > > > > > noise of with "our" pure dev discussions :)). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 10:22 PM Eric Maynard < > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I share this concern — further, it’s not entirely clear to > me > > > what > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > distinction between a user and a dev is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namely, we’ve had many discussions in this mailing list > about > > > > > > extension > > > > > > > > > points within Polaris. It could be said that in many cases, > > > users > > > > > > are not > > > > > > > > > expected to use the service completely out of the box but > > > rather to > > > > > > do some > > > > > > > > > “development” to suit their needs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I’m implementing my own metastore or building an > > > integration > > > > > > with my > > > > > > > > > IdP, am I a user or a dev? Which mailing list can best > > address > > > my > > > > > > question? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we do create a new mailing list, I think we’ll need to > > > consider > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > exactly the use of each list should be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > —EM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 1:13 PM Yufei Gu < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi JB, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. It’s a good problem to have > as > > > the > > > > > > community > > > > > > > > > > grows :-)! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My only concern is that the set of people who can answer > > most > > > > > > questions are > > > > > > > > > > mainly on the dev list today. Splitting into two lists > > might > > > risk > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > fragmentation, duplicated answers, and less participation > > > > > overall. > > > > > > Right > > > > > > > > > > now Slack already works well for quick user questions, > and > > we > > > > > also > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > GitHub Discussions as another channel. Maybe once the > > > community > > > > > > grows > > > > > > > > > > larger, it would make sense to revisit the idea of a > > > dedicated > > > > > > user list. > > > > > > > > > > Just my two cents. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 12:15 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi JB, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Adding a users mailing list would be good from my POV. > I > > > > > imagine > > > > > > we could > > > > > > > > > > > leave slack for more informal user-to-user discussions, > > > while > > > > > > treating > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > users ML as a means for requesting information from > > Polaris > > > > > > developers / > > > > > > > > > > > maintainers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I imagine if something new or unusual but affecting > many > > > users > > > > > > were to > > > > > > > > > > come > > > > > > > > > > > up in slack, it would not be unreasonable to move such > a > > > > > > conversation to > > > > > > > > > > > the users ML so that responses and advice would be > > > archived for > > > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That said, I see some overlap with GH discussions, so I > > > wonder > > > > > > if we may > > > > > > > > > > > want to make GH discussion read-only if we enable the > new > > > ML > > > > > (in > > > > > > order to > > > > > > > > > > > direct all questions to one system). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My personal preference is with users ML over GH > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 2:55 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It’s great to see more and more users asking > questions > > on > > > > > > Slack. > > > > > > > > > > > > To give a voice to anyone and a way to ask > questions, I > > > > > wonder > > > > > > if we > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > not create a user mailing list. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dev will be used to discuss technical details, > changes, > > > > > > proposals, > > > > > > > > > > > > decisions (as we do today). User will be dedicated to > > > users > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > questions, help requests, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
