All,

I can see the value in a user list now for the noise advoidance value.

I routinely have more than 50 new messages on the dev list when I login to
my email, and even using googlemail with threading (which not all our users
will be using) it's quite hard to see the wood for the trees :-)

Marnie


On 11/23/06, Rajith Attapattu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

If we have a substantial user base already then I think there is value in
going for a user list.
I agree and understand the point made by Cliff and Paul about the
community
being fragmented.

But I also see agree with roberts comments. I think unlike other incubator
projects we do have some users already.
The user may find it a bit intimidating/confusing when they subscribe to
the
dev list.

If users are already using Qpid in production then they may have
significant
amount of questions.
I as a dev and the majority of user swould like to see those questions on
a
seperate list so that we don't create too much distraction for either
party.

Regards,

Rajith

On 11/22/06, Robert Greig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 22/11/06, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > For this reason, incubating projects these days are generally
> > encouraged to keep both user and devs together on one list until the
> > user-oriented traffic grows to a point that it becomes too noisy and
> > not useful for all developers to be hearing.
>
> I'd turn that round slightly and ask if it's reasonable to make our
> users wade through all sorts of (to them) noise on the dev list?
>
> I certainly think all developers should subscribe to the user list,
> and interact with the users.
>
> I know from helping our internal users of Qpid that many users are
> looking for help migrating from other products and are working to
> deadlines. They want to be able to get help and advice quickly and I
> think asking them to subscribe to a dev list would put them off. It
> might also confuse them as we discuss features or concepts only
> applicable to in-development versions as opposed to releases.
>
> RG
>


Reply via email to