Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > Tim Ellison wrote: >> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: >>> >>> Tim Ellison wrote: <snip> >> What steps should I stop doing? > > It was a joke, referring to my continual plea to get some of the > conversations out and into -dev@
Sorry, the joke was lost on me. I would like to help reduce the volume of jira mail. For me it is easy enough to create a client filter to put messages sent from [EMAIL PROTECTED] in a separate folder, but I can quite understand the request to filter server-side, by moving the mail to a less-subscribed mailing list (commits) or its own mailing list or whatever. >>>> Every state change produces mail to the world - even though it is >>>> likely >>>> only of interest to the reporter, assignee, and watchers. i.e. any way >>>> to solve the problem rather than move it ;-) >>> Every change should be visible to everyone for maximum transparency, or >>> so I believe. It would be a pain in the rear if one had to explicitly >>> sign up for each jira one was interested in. >> >> Some people say every JIRA state change / comment is too much 'spam' -- >> you want to see them all ... > > Yes, because mail is easy to delete, filter, ignore. > > More importantly, I think a model that requires the community to > individually add themselves to each JIRA as a watcher is one prone to > failure of oversight. I know that I'd forget, and I believe that full > flows like this sometimes catch the attention of a new person to > participate. There also is the issue of archiving that mail stream... > It could be that isn't as important because JIRA has the info, but OTOH > someone might want to prove something was done with full exposure to the > community. Sure. > I guess my answer right now is that given how we are currently using > JIRA, I can't think of anything to cut out... > > Now that it doesn't go to -dev@, it's easier for those that want to > participate less? > > Maybe we have a separate list for the jira flow that we ask every > committer to sub to, but then people can just watch -dev@ and/or > -commit@ and not have to deal with it? Lets see how it goes with the mail going to -commit@ >>> That said, once the VM activity gets really honking, we'll probably need >>> a second stream for those... >> >> Not sure why the VM is special here. > > Not special, but different. It will be a separate group of people > working on different things, so we may want to start segmenting the mail > streams. People may really not care about VM stuff if the work on > classlib stuff, or classlib stuff if they are focused on the JIT or > something. > > We'll have to see. I agree. Regards, Tim >>>> Leo Simons wrote: >>>>> Taking care of this now... >>>>> >>>>> I will note that this makes it even more important for committers and >>>>> active contributors to subscribe to the commits mailing list - a >>>>> lot of >>>>> important information is in those jira messages. >>>>> >>>>> I will also note that it *also* makes it even more important that Jira >>>>> is not used for discussion - that really needs to happen here on the >>>>> mailing list where everyone can track it. The ASF has had some bad >>>>> experience in the past with too much communication going via the issue >>>>> tracker; this isn't so much a guideline as it is a pretty hard >>>>> requirement. >>>>> >>>>> - Leo >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 08:17:45AM -0600, Archie Cobbs wrote: >>>>>> Mark Hindess wrote: >>>>>>> Geir, There are quite a lot of JIRA messages these days, perhaps it >>>>>>> is time to split the JIRA traffic to a separate list with a reply-to >>>>>>> set to harmony-dev. Or perhaps just have them sent to the commit >>>>>>> list? >>>>>> Yes, please... +1e6 >>>>>> >>>>>> -Archie >> > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
