On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 01:22 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2015-03-13 08:06:43 -0700: > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > > Clint Byrum wrote: > > > > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to > > > > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra > > > > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread. > > > > > > > > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being > > > > on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly > > > > digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be > > > > filtered out for those that don't benefit from them. > > > > > > The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people > > > know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some > > > announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic > > > and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to > > > openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line > > > drawn ? > > > > > > The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in > > > case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some > > > python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke > > > the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying > > > announcements defeats that purpose. > > > > > > We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to > > > a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split > > > announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be > > > granted openstack-announce access ? > > > > > > Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack" > > > project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in > > > a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev. > > > We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements > > > are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's > > > worth it. > > > > > > So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and > > > I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two > > > classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not). > > > > We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release > > announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release > > might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to > > make it easy to create uniform and informative release note emails > > containing the level of detail people wanted. So far those are only > > being used by Oslo, but we're moving the scripts to the release-tools > > repo to make them easy for all library maintainers to use. > > > > This is really what I'm asking about. If people were less happy with not > having them, then it makes sense to have them. > > > These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the > > folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are > > we going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce > > list complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are > > enough developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the > > release messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet? > > > > I hope I don't come across as complaining. I archive them very rapidly > without ever looking at the content currently. Sometimes they come up in > my searches for topics and then having them in the single timeline is > great, but I have an email reader that supports this without changing > the list behavior. I am more wondering if people who aren't as optimized > as I am have trouble keeping up with them. And having a few less things > to archive manually would certainly be nicer for me, but is a secondary > goal. > > I haven't seen very much interest in changing things, mostly people in > support of keeping them as-is. So I suspect people are not annoyed about > this in particular, and we can close the book on this thread.
OK, I also don't want to give the impression that I don't want to change things, but I want to make sure we still achieve the goals we had. If there's a way to make the messages easier to process that doesn't "hide" them from the audience that needs to see them, we can adjust our processes. Doug > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: > [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
