Ruben, I'm afraid I'm still -1 on this. I think the traffic is reasonable enough and don't want to hive MH into different components each with their own list. I think just separating it into devs and users is enough, and encourages us to have a holistic view of the system.
One of the problems with mailing lists is that you might not be interested in 100% of the messages. This is unfortunate but inevitable. Chris > I'd like to change my #proposal, since it has received a negative > vote, and creating a separate list for *ALL* capture devices. > > It was a suggestion of Tobias and I think it's quite reasonable, > because (quoting him) we are foreseeing new devices coming in the > future and such a list would bring vendors and users together, while > keeping those who don't own a devices from receiving unnecessary mail. > > Another argument in favor of this solution is that it's very easy for > people who is interested in discussions around the devices AND other > topics to subscribe to different list, while having a single list for > everything makes more difficult to separate the relevant mail. > Capture *devices*, in opposition to the official *software* CA, seem > like a quite specific topic to deserve a list of their own. > > Otherwise, I don't see why we keep the "users" and "matterhorn" lists > separate, since both of them address questions related to Matterhorn, > people in both lists are "using" Matterhorn (so Matterhorn "users" > post to the "matterhorn" list too). The borders seem more blurry in > this case, and however I don't think anybody has anything against > keeping those list separate. > > > > El 23 de abril de 2012 18:48, Rubén Pérez <[email protected]> > escribió: > > > Don, > > > > I'm sorry if my reply sounded too harsh. I wanted to know other > > people's opinion and I appreciate you are sharing yours. > > > > I think I didn't make myself clear. What I meant was that I think > > that public announcements about products related to MH are > > acceptable, but I don't see the point of broadcasting support > > requests to people who cannot and will not provide support. > > > > For instance, if somebody writes a mail called "Reflections about > > the MCD", with their impressions about the device after testing it, > > I'd say the mh-users list is the right place, because it may not > > only be interesting for current MCD users, but for prospective > > users and even people not intending to buy the device, but > > interested in comparing the different alternatives to the capture > > agent. On the other hand, a mail called "I updated my MCD firmware > > and now the device does not register with the core" is interesting > > only for people who own a device and may encounter the same > > problem, or may help the person who wrote the mail. > > > > I'm just thinking what will happen if we address all the technical > > questions of Galicaster to the mh-users list, and if NCast does the > > same with their Matterhorn-related devices, and any other future > > vendor will use mh-users as their default support line. It just > > doesn't make sense. > > > > Best regards > > Rubén > > > > > > 2012/4/23 Don Rainwater <[email protected]> > > > >> Sorry, I'm not trying to be contrary, but… > >> > >> What's the difference between: > >> > >> - a thread about Epiphans when you're not interested in Epiphans > >> > >> - a thread about Matterhorn2GO when you're not interested in mobile > >> deployments > >> > >> You could argue that more people are interested in Matterhorn2GO, > >> but if someone else is not, then it's not relevant to them. > >> > >> The comparison to the Mac OS X Server list (or to, say, a Linux > >> mailing list) is apt. Like Matterhorn/Opencast, it(/they) > >> deliver(s) a number of services, each of which may or may not be > >> of interest to a given person. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Apr 23, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Rubén Pérez wrote: > >> > >> Don, > >> > >> You always have the chance to review the list archives if you > >> happen to get interest on a topic you were not interested before. > >> My point is, I'd say your "Mac OS X Server" mailing list would > >> correspond to a hypothetical "Epiphan MCD" mail list, while the > >> mh-users list would be more like an "Apple Users" list. I find the > >> Epiphan MCD a topic too specific to be interesting to the general > >> public, at least the questions related to the specific issues > >> regarding the configuration and use of the device. If I don't own > >> such a device, I can be interested in their characteristics and > >> features, or any developments that can be relevant to the > >> community in general (for instance, a new Matterhorn2GO version in > >> the Apple Store), but why a certain user cannot log in to > >> Matterhorn with their MCD is totally irrelevant for me, and I > >> neither can help them. > >> > >> 2012/4/23 Don Rainwater <[email protected]> > >> > >>> I see your points. As a parallel example, I follow the Mac OS X > >>> Server mailing list. There are many threads on that list that > >>> are completely unrelated to my shop, but that doesn't mean that > >>> they won't be relevant down the road. A year ago, I may not have > >>> been interested in, say, Profile Manager, but now I have several > >>> people that want us to implement it to help them manage their > >>> growing number of iPads. So I'm interested now, and I may > >>> remember (or be able to search for) a thread or two on that list > >>> that might help me implement that service. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 10:32 AM, Rubén Pérez wrote: > >>> > >>> Tobias, > >>> I agree with both your statements (btw, did you actually > >>> calculate the percentages? :P). > >>> Re. 1), yes, if we were to create a new list for the Epiphan MCD, > >>> then we should create another one for any other device that > >>> should appear, if we want to be fair. > >>> Re. 2), I totally agree with you, but given the "special" status > >>> of the MCD, it can be considered an exception. However, I share > >>> your opinion that the support/support lists should be kept by the > >>> vendors, e.g. Galicaster has its own list and it never crossed > >>> our mind to ask Opencast to create one, nor we told the > >>> prospective adopters to direct their questions to the Opencast > >>> list. > >>> > >>> Don, > >>> I don't see which ideas can float in a thread called "Epiphan > >>> appliance > >>> - not reporting to core" or "what's the maximum concurrent > >>> connections of MCD for live broadcasting", to name two. These > >>> specific questions are too... well, specific, to cause a debate > >>> which may be interesting outside of the question at hand. Of > >>> course, any discussions that might apply to the capturing side in > >>> general, but not to an specific implementation, should be > >>> addressed to the official Opencast lists, but I hardly see which > >>> benefit can get the Epiphan MCD users from members of the > >>> community who (like myself) won't even open those threads. > >>> > >>> Best regards > >>> > >>> 2012/4/23 Don Rainwater <[email protected]> > >>> > >>>> In my opinion, it would be better to keep the capture agent > >>>> traffic on the main list. Even though everyone may not be > >>>> interested in hearing about Epiphans today, it can be good to > >>>> see ideas float by from outside your current focus. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Tobias Wunden wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > Hi Ruben, > >>>> > > >>>> > you are right that about 30% of all e-mails on the users list > >>>> > are > >>>> about capture agents, of which are 70% around the Epiphan MCD. > >>>> From that point of view it would certainly make sense to create > >>>> a new list. I can see a few problems though with your proposal: > >>>> > > >>>> > 1) Opencast is not and should not be affiliated with a single > >>>> > vendor. > >>>> This means, if we create a new list for the Epiphan device, we > >>>> should create one (or be prepared to creating one) for other > >>>> manufacturers as well. > >>>> > > >>>> > 2) It would basically turn Opencast into a support group for > >>>> > one or > >>>> multiple capture devices. With Greg being the main developer on > >>>> the MCD and a community menber at the same time it may make > >>>> sense, however I almost feel like support (or at least a support > >>>> list) should be located with the vendors and not with the > >>>> community. > >>>> > > >>>> > Maybe creating a list for capture devices itself would make > >>>> > sense > >>>> instead? My hope is that we'll see more capture devices appear > >>>> soon, so bringing both the vendors and the users together on a > >>>> shared list may make sense? > >>>> > > >>>> > Tobias > >>>> > > >>>> > On 23.04.2012, at 13:05, Rubén Pérez <[email protected]> > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> >> Dear list, > >>>> >> > >>>> >> We are seeing quite a big volume of mails related to problems > >>>> >> or > >>>> questions re. the Epiphan MCD capture device. That's indeed a > >>>> good sign that a great number of adopters are getting interest > >>>> in the product and considering it for their deployments, but > >>>> while there is a good number of MCD users, there is also a lot > >>>> of people who is not using it, and has little or no interest in > >>>> the questions/problems with the device. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Therefore, I'm #proposing a new epiphan-mcd (or similar) mail > >>>> >> list > >>>> is created, so that the people interested in the device can post > >>>> their questions there, while the rest of the community don't > >>>> have to filter out the mails regarding that. Besides, as the > >>>> questions regarding the MCD are very specific, so only those > >>>> institutions that have bought some unit(s) and are actually > >>>> using it/them can actually provide support. In other words, all > >>>> the MCD-related issues are specific enough and separate from the > >>>> rest of the system to deserve a specific mail list, from my > >>>> point of view. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I'd like to hear your opinions, comments and/or criticism > >>>> >> regarding > >>>> this matter. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Best regards > >>>> >> Rubén > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Matterhorn mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> To unsubscribe please email > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Matterhorn mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > >>> > >>> > >>> To unsubscribe please email > >>> [email protected] > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Matterhorn mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > >>> > >>> > >>> To unsubscribe please email > >>> [email protected] > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Matterhorn mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > >> > >> > >> To unsubscribe please email > >> [email protected] > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Matterhorn mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > >> > >> > >> To unsubscribe please email > >> [email protected] > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > -- Christopher Brooks, BSc, MSc ARIES Laboratory, University of Saskatchewan Web: http://www.cs.usask.ca/~cab938 Phone: 1.306.966.1442 Mail: Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems Laboratory Department of Computer Science University of Saskatchewan 176 Thorvaldson Building 110 Science Place Saskatoon, SK S7N 5C9 _______________________________________________ Matterhorn mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
