Yes, I agree that we should close down the existing Google group on Jan 1st. While it’s more convenient to use, it’s created confusion. I hope that we can get the ASF to support better search interfaces in the future too. I think we just have to drive this from within.
The Google Group should be a nice way to make the content searchable from the web. We should also see what it takes to make it mirrored on Nabble (http://www.nabble.com). I’ve found a lot of information about other projects there, and other Apache projects do use it. Matei On Dec 19, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Andy Konwinski <andykonwin...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've set up two new unofficial google groups to mirror the Apache Spark user > and dev lists: > > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/apache-spark-dev-mirror > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/apache-spark-user-mirror > > Basically these lists each subscribe to the corresponding Apache list. > > They do not allow folks to subscribe directly to them. Getting emails from > the Google Group would offer no advantages that I can think of and we really > want to encourage folks to sign up for the official mailing list instead. > > The lists do allow the public to send email to them, which I think might be > necessary since the "from:" field for all emails that get distributed via the > Apache mailing list is set to the author of the email. > > I think this might be a great compromise. At least we can try this out and > see how it goes. > > Matei, can you confirm that Jan 1 is the date we want to turn off the > existing spark-users google group? > > We could consider using the existing spark-developers and spark-users google > groups instead of the two new ones I just created but I think that it is much > more obvious to have the lists include the word mirror in their names. > > The dev list mirror seems to be working, because I see the last couple emails > from this thread in it already. I'll confirm and ensure that the user list > mirror is working too. > > Thoughts? > > Andy > > P.S. Thanks to Patrick for suggesting this to me originally. > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Aaron Davidson <ilike...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'd be fine with one-way mirrors here (Apache threads being reflected in > Google groups) -- I have no idea how one is supposed to navigate the Apache > list to look for historic threads. > > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Mike Potts <maspo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks very much for the prompt and comprehensive reply! I appreciate the > overarching desire to integrate with apache: I'm very happy to hear that > there's a move to use the existing groups as mirrors: that will overcome all > of my objections: particularly if it's bidirectional! :) > > > On Thursday, December 19, 2013 7:19:06 PM UTC-8, Andy Konwinski wrote: > Hey Mike, > > As you probably noticed when you CC'd spark-de...@googlegroups.com, that list > has already be reconfigured so that it no longer allows posting (and bounces > emails sent to it). > > We will be doing the same thing to the spark...@googlegroups.com list too > (we'll announce a date for that soon). > > That may sound very frustrating, and you are *not* alone feeling that way. > We've had a long conversation with our mentors about this, and I've felt very > similar to you, so I'd like to give you background. > > As I'm coming to see it, part of becoming an Apache project is moving the > community *fully* over to Apache infrastructure, and more generally the > Apache way of organizing the community. > > This applies in both the nuts-and-bolts sense of being on apache infra, but > possibly more importantly, it is also a guiding principle and way of thinking. > > In various ways, moving to apache Infra can be a painful process, and IMO the > loss of all the great mailing list functionality that comes with using Google > Groups is perhaps the most painful step. But basically, the de facto mailing > lists need to be the Apache ones, and not Google Groups. The underlying > reason is that Apache needs to take full accountability for recording and > publishing the mailing lists, it has to be able to institutionally guarantee > this. This is because discussion on mailing lists is one of the core things > that defines an Apache community. So at a minimum this means Apache owning > the master copy of the bits. > > All that said, we are discussing the possibility of having a google group > that subscribes to each list that would provide an easier to use and prettier > archive for each list (so far we haven't gotten that to work). > > I hope this was helpful. It has taken me a few years now, and a lot of > conversations with experienced (and patient!) Apache mentors, to internalize > some of the nuance about "the Apache way". That's why I wanted to share. > > Andy > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Mike Potts <masp...@gmail.com> wrote: > I notice that there are still a lot of active topics in this group: and also > activity on the apache mailing list (which is a really horrible experience!). > Is it a firm policy on apache's front to disallow external groups? I'm > going to be ramping up on spark, and I really hate the idea of having to rely > on the apache archives and my mail client. Also: having to search for > topics/keywords both in old threads (here) as well as new threads in apache's > (clunky) archive, is going to be a pain! I almost feel like I must be > missing something because the current solution seems unfeasibly awkward! > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Spark Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to spark-users...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Spark Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to spark-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
