On 05/09/2017 10:51 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay
> <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Amar Tumballi <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> > I personally prefer github questions than mailing list, because a valid
>> > question can later become a reason for a new feature. Also, as you
said,
>> > we
>> > can 'assignee' a question and if we start with bug triage we can also
>> > make
>> > sure at least we respond to questions which is pending.
>>
>> Is the on-going discussion in this thread about using
>> <https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues
<https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues>> as a method to have
>> questions and responses from the community?
>
>
> yeah, this is something users have started doing. It seems better than
mail
> (at least to me).
>
There is a trend of projects who are moving to Github Issues as a
medium/platform for responding to queries. As Amar mentions earlier in
the thread and Shyam implies - this requires constant (ie. daily)
vigil and attention. If those are in place, it is a practical move.
People who respond on gluster-users do this already. Github issues is a
better tool to do this (Again IMHO). It is a bit easier to know what
questions are still open to be answered with github. Even after multiple
responses on gluster-users mail you won't be sure if it is answered or
not, so one has to go through the responses. Where as on github we can
close it once answered. So these kinds of things are the reason for
asking this.
Shyam,
I started being more active on github because of the user
questions. So may be different people take different paths to be more
active on github.com/gluster <http://github.com/gluster>. Some people
may not be as active on github even after we wait for a long time just
like in gluster-users so may be we should start using it for questions
sooner? Thoughts? It will only encourage more developers to be active on
github.
I want *maintainers* to be fully active on github issues for features,
and also to maintain the project boards for the focus areas and
respective components. Further (as others have stated) we need triage
setup for github. Once such action is seen and executed, moving to
github becomes more real for other purposes.
The original intention was to move to github for bugs as well, if you
recollect. There was always a question about ML vs github for the same,
yes github is more useful, but to repeat, let's get better at managing
feature, component, focus area and release scope via github and then
take it to a larger group.
Currently disrupting the users ML and asking them to move to github
issues (in addition to the ML?), will create noise for what we intend to
achieve with github projects and issues. If we can handle what we
started out with better over time, then we can take on the additional
noise and handle the same, till then we may just set ourselves up for
failure.
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
<http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel>
--
Pranith
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
