Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[golinux]

On 2016-11-23 05:06, hellekin wrote:


I feel like every time I'm trying to touch something, nobody cares, or
resist for some obscure reason.  In these conditions, I'm very much
doubting my own capacity to bring anything worth to this community.  
I'd

like that it's made clear, so I can better orient my energy.

==
hk



Sometimes life does not work out as expected.  How many scientists have 
worked for years on a theorem only to realize it was based on an 
erroneous assumption?  And I wonder how many Picasso sketches ended up 
in the trash along the way.


Your intentions are always for the well-being of the Devuan community 
and the community thanks and supports you for that.  But your vision 
with discourse did not resonate well with Devuan's collective 
consciousness.  Perhaps the doc sprint will change that dynamic.  
Perhaps not.  There is no blame.  It just is.  And life goes on . . .  
:)


Be well dear friend,

golinux





___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[KatolaZ]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:06:34PM +0100, hellekin wrote:
> 
> Come on, it's a linear discussion, much like email.  Moreover nobody
> gave it a chance to work all the way from conversation to discussion to
> wiki to static page with comments looping back to conversation.
> Resistance has spoken.  The DocSprint is supposed to change that, and
> show that it's worth trying.


Hi Hellekin,

just to say that I believe the DocSprint is indeed a great
initiative. We should actually have more of them.

Personally, I have never liked discourse, the main reason being that I
have never liked web-based discussion fora. Fora are very good tools
for user support, but pretty useless (IMHO) for discussions. On my
side there is no other hidden reason, no intention to boicot anything,
and no thought resistance. Unfortunately, the fact that I have to use
a browser to use some content on the Internet is already pretty
disturbing to me :)

HND

KatolaZ

-- 
[ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - GLUGCT -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
[ "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
[   @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
[ @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
[ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Alessandro Selli]

On 23/11/2016 at 12:06, hellekin wrote:

[...]

> I feel like every time I'm trying to touch something, nobody cares, or
> resist for some obscure reason.  In these conditions, I'm very much
> doubting my own capacity to bring anything worth to this community.  I'd
> like that it's made clear, so I can better orient my energy.

  Please, don't give up.  Value more those who are willing to help or
appreciate what you're doing and ignore those who do nothing but
complain and criticize.  We too do have a lot to complain about systemd
and do criticize the direction many mainstream distributions have taken,
but we make it well clear why we do it and share sound technical and
philosophical ground to go our way out of the mainstream.  Let's be a
team, let's show the big guys small but determined and capable
communities are still capable of doing great things for GNU/Linux and
deliver simpler, more robust and dependable systems.
I'm silent most of the time, but I do appreciate what the Devuan team
has being doing and are very grateful this distribution exists and grows.

  The silent majority has spoken, at last!  :-)

Alessandro

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Steve Litt]

On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 12:06:34 +0100
hellekin  wrote:

> On 11/09/2016 11:05 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
> > 
> > The final documentation should be done on something more permanent,
> > based on the back-and forth in email. The talk.devuan.org would be a
> > great place to put the finished docs. My problem with
> > talk.devuan.org is when I used it for brainstorming. I couldn't
> > tell who wrote what when, and it ended up a mixed up jumble instead
> > of good documentation. 
> 
> Come on, it's a linear discussion, much like email.  

I'm just saying: I tried and it became a mixed up jumble. It doesn't
have the equivalent of email's hash marks, and you can't tell who wrote
what without extensive mind-draining parsing.

> Moreover nobody
> gave it a chance to work all the way from conversation to discussion
> to wiki to static page with comments looping back to conversation.

We gave it as much of a chance as our schedules allowed. The thing was
a time sink.


> Resistance has spoken.  The DocSprint is supposed to change that, and
> show that it's worth trying.
> 
> The finished docs should be in devuan-doc package, that you can read
> in various formats, including a nice HTML documentation on localhost,
> that you can mirror anywhere and translate easily.  

Everyone agrees with the preceding paragraph. The preceding paragraph
has nothing to do with, or should have nothing to do with,
devuan-discuss or talk.devuan.org. How we arrive at thoughts that go
into documentation is a human challenge, not a technological one. If it
were most convenient to have those discussions with two tin cans and a
string, that's what we should do. It turns out that a mailing list like
DNG is the most convenient way for people scattered across the globe to
have a discussion.

> It's been the
> plan for a long time, and there have been two types of reaction: help
> doing it, or complain.

The message of the preceding paragraph was used over and over again by
Debian's systemd supporters in the Debian-User civil war. Complaining
is a perfectly acceptable response when the thing needing help is a bad
thing.

The alternative to devuan-discuss is obvious: Talk out the documentation
parameters on DNG, and when agreement has been reached, somebody makes
a devuan-doc document based on the DNG thread. That works, it's easy,
we already have the infrastructure, it's popular. Just do that.

> 
> I feel like every time I'm trying to touch something, nobody cares, or
> resist for some obscure reason.  In these conditions, I'm very much
> doubting my own capacity to bring anything worth to this community.
> I'd like that it's made clear, so I can better orient my energy.

That's not rational. You've been a huge part of making Devuan. Everyone
cared, nobody resisted. You're focusing on this one little thing:
Devuan-discuss, that's not popular, probably because it's a huge
inconvenience to users. You have a big win: Devuan. You have a tiny
loss: Devuan-discuss. There's no rational way this can be translated
into not being able to "bring anything worth to this community."

Every single person in this community likes and is grateful for the
majority of your contributions.

Thanks,
 
SteveT

Steve Litt 
November 2016 featured book: Quit Joblessness: Start Your Own Business
http://www.troubleshooters.com/startbiz
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Miroslav Rovis]

On 161123-13:15+0100, hellekin wrote:
> On 11/23/2016 01:12 PM, Simon Hobson wrote:
> > hellekin  wrote:
> > 
> >> ... nobody cares
> > 
> > As someone who is not really in a position to contribute much at all, let 
> > me say that I'm grateful to all who are working towards making Devuan 
> > "happen" - regardless of the size of their contribution.
> > I watch (or at least, skim) most of the discussions, mostly I work on the 
> > basis of "if I can't contribute in a positive way, then I keep quiet and 
> > 'let those who can, do'" and I suspect there are a few on the list with the 
> > same approach - so don't take silence as meaning not interested or doesn't 
> > care.
> > 
I feel the same (or similar) as Simon. I care, but I can't change much.
> 
> Thanks Simon,
> 
> What makes you feel you can't contribute much?
> ==
> hk
> 

I can tell you for myself. If I pregress at the pace that I'm
progressing (but I started too late: after 40, and I'm 60, and only
young at desire to do, but alas! with too little skills to do)...

If I pregress at the pace that I'm progressing, I may be able to
contribute in at least a few more years only...

It takes real developer to really do something about Devuan...

And seeing systemd take over a lot of distro is such a shame...

What happened to so many others that were around and some have actually
started this, but are no longer around... Icaac Dunham... Then the vdev
guy, Jude C. Nelson (IIRC)... and many others...

I also remember I saw some people having been banned, and then others
asking why they were (and telling about their comments about some issue
being discussed on this mailing list), but those that were banned did
not reappear, apparently they were not admitted back, or?

I hope this project still takes off in the future. With systemd the
Linux is going to its own nice looking ruin (will be in the hands of the
big business, surveillance and all)...

Regards!

-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[hellekin]

On 11/23/2016 01:12 PM, Simon Hobson wrote:
> hellekin  wrote:
> 
>> ... nobody cares
> 
> As someone who is not really in a position to contribute much at all, let me 
> say that I'm grateful to all who are working towards making Devuan "happen" - 
> regardless of the size of their contribution.
> I watch (or at least, skim) most of the discussions, mostly I work on the 
> basis of "if I can't contribute in a positive way, then I keep quiet and 'let 
> those who can, do'" and I suspect there are a few on the list with the same 
> approach - so don't take silence as meaning not interested or doesn't care.
> 

Thanks Simon,

my interest is in more people participating in collective intelligence
and collective action.  What would make you think you're in a position
to contribute anything at all?  What makes you feel you can't contribute
much?

==
hk

-- 
 _ _ We are free to share code and we code to share freedom
(_X_)yne Foundation, Free Culture Foundry * https://www.dyne.org/donate/
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Simon Hobson]

hellekin  wrote:

> ... nobody cares

As someone who is not really in a position to contribute much at all, let me 
say that I'm grateful to all who are working towards making Devuan "happen" - 
regardless of the size of their contribution.
I watch (or at least, skim) most of the discussions, mostly I work on the basis 
of "if I can't contribute in a positive way, then I keep quiet and 'let those 
who can, do'" and I suspect there are a few on the list with the same approach 
- so don't take silence as meaning not interested or doesn't care.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[hellekin]

On 11/09/2016 11:05 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
> 
> The final documentation should be done on something more permanent,
> based on the back-and forth in email. The talk.devuan.org would be a
> great place to put the finished docs. My problem with talk.devuan.org
> is when I used it for brainstorming. I couldn't tell who wrote what
> when, and it ended up a mixed up jumble instead of good documentation.
> 

Come on, it's a linear discussion, much like email.  Moreover nobody
gave it a chance to work all the way from conversation to discussion to
wiki to static page with comments looping back to conversation.
Resistance has spoken.  The DocSprint is supposed to change that, and
show that it's worth trying.

The finished docs should be in devuan-doc package, that you can read in
various formats, including a nice HTML documentation on localhost, that
you can mirror anywhere and translate easily.  It's been the plan for a
long time, and there have been two types of reaction: help doing it, or
complain.

I feel like every time I'm trying to touch something, nobody cares, or
resist for some obscure reason.  In these conditions, I'm very much
doubting my own capacity to bring anything worth to this community.  I'd
like that it's made clear, so I can better orient my energy.

==
hk

-- 
 _ _ We are free to share code and we code to share freedom
(_X_)yne Foundation, Free Culture Foundry * https://www.dyne.org/donate/
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Steve Litt]

On Wed, 09 Nov 2016 11:55:35 -0600
goli...@dyne.org wrote:

> On 2016-11-08 13:55, Jaromil wrote:
> > 
> > I also very much appreciate the talk.devuan.org documentation
> > platform and it is true that's better communicated as such, rather
> > than a forum 
> 
> Agreed.  This is a much better description of it's purpose.

Pre-cisely!

Brainstorming is best done on email, always assuming the participants
trim properly and interleave post.

The final documentation should be done on something more permanent,
based on the back-and forth in email. The talk.devuan.org would be a
great place to put the finished docs. My problem with talk.devuan.org
is when I used it for brainstorming. I couldn't tell who wrote what
when, and it ended up a mixed up jumble instead of good documentation.

Thanks,
 
SteveT

Steve Litt 
November 2016 featured book: Quit Joblessness: Start Your Own Business
http://www.troubleshooters.com/startbiz
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[golinux]

On 2016-11-08 13:55, Jaromil wrote:


I also very much appreciate the talk.devuan.org documentation platform
and it is true that's better communicated as such, rather than a forum



Agreed.  This is a much better description of it's purpose.



. . . if someone feels like volunteering time and gear to run a phpbb 
forum

in a reliable way, we surely won't overlook it, but include it in the
available options to get in touch and support it as we can. It can be
a fun adventure, but beware it may become very big



I do hope that someone steps up to do that.  I'd be happy to assist with 
skinning to integrate with the Devuan color scheme.


golinux


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Hendrik Boom]

On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:05:38PM -0500, Rob Owens wrote:
> A solution might be to:
> 
> 1)  rename this list if deemed necessary

And inform gmane of thte change.

> 2)  route all devuan-discuss emails to dng

-- hendrik

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Thomas Besser]

Am 09.11.2016 um 00:44 schrieb Gregory Nowak:
> If you wouldn't have just mentioned "the "Debian is Not GNOME"
> antagonist pattern," I would have continued in thinking that dng
> stands for "debian next generation", as with lprng, which I rather
> like actually.

Never thought about the meaning of DNG, perhaps I'm using it over NNTP &
gmane and there it is listed as "gmane.linux.devuan.devel".

But I like the reinterpretation "Debian Next Generation".

>> Don't you have a problem thinking about Devuan as "Debian without systemd"?
> 
> No, not at all. That's what I wanted out of debian 8, and that's what
> I was expecting out of devuan 1 when I switched.

+1

Thomas

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Didier Kryn]

Le 08/11/2016 21:05, hellekin a écrit :

On 11/06/2016 02:59 PM, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:

Based on these observations, I think the information on [2] should be
updated to tell DNG is the primary ML. devuan-discuss would better be
closed and all the subscribers informed that DNG is the primary ML for
getting help and discuss about Devuan, because it has always been and
people never switched to devuan-discuss.


The devuan-discuss mailing list was created to harmonize the lists:
devuan-announce, devuan-discuss, and devuan-dev, and to move away from
the "Debian is Not GNOME" antagonist pattern.

People never switched because there was no discussion about the identity
of Devuan.  All we know is that Devuan is not Debian.  But we can't
define our identity on a negative: Devuan has another energy than just
being opposed to a unequivocal way of thinking about free software.

I'm sad that people who were determined enough to switch distro would be
lazy enough to not jump ships and say: here we are, we are Devuan, and
we are not just against stuff.

I love the idea of having a history and roots, and that DNG is the heart
of our common ancestry.  I know people use email filters that have to be
updated in order to keep the sorting going.  But I hate thinking about
GNOME every time I post to DNG, for the simple reason that I have never
used it and do not feel concerned about opposing GNOME.  I'm sure it
works for a number of people, and I'm not part of them.

Don't you have a problem thinking about Devuan as "Debian without systemd"?

I know we're still early in the process of differentiation, but I'm
already pretty sure that what Devuan is becoming is not *in comparison
of* anything.  The fact we're receiving news of people making new
derivatives regularly should be much more important in our decision
making than any anti-foo bigotry.

So yes, devuan-discuss is not useful.  But contrary to what Jaromil
said, it was not a 'top-down' approach to create it: if it were,
everybody on DNG would have been subscribed to devuan-discuss and DNG
would have been closed and kept for historical reason, which is what
should happen if we really cared to think about our identity as an
universal free software operating system.

I understand Devuan as neither top-down nor bottom-up, but organic and
transversal. So I don't say bottom-up: I say topless.

Regards,



Hi Hellekin.

Please don't be too much embarrassed with "Devuan is Not Gnome". As 
negative as it may appear at first glance, it is obviously inspired by 
"Gnu is Not Unix", which is a pretty honourable reference, and which 
isn't actually headed against Unix but just means it is (slightly) 
different.


Cheers.
Didier


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Gregory Nowak]

On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 01:05:27PM +0100, hellekin wrote:
> The devuan-discuss mailing list was created to harmonize the lists:
> devuan-announce, devuan-discuss, and devuan-dev, and to move away from
> the "Debian is Not GNOME" antagonist pattern.

If you wouldn't have just mentioned "the "Debian is Not GNOME"
antagonist pattern," I would have continued in thinking that dng
stands for "debian next generation", as with lprng, which I rather
like actually.

> Don't you have a problem thinking about Devuan as "Debian without systemd"?

No, not at all. That's what I wanted out of debian 8, and that's what
I was expecting out of devuan 1 when I switched.

> So yes, devuan-discuss is not useful.  But contrary to what Jaromil
> said, it was not a 'top-down' approach to create it: if it were,
> everybody on DNG would have been subscribed to devuan-discuss and DNG
> would have been closed and kept for historical reason, which is what
> should happen if we really cared to think about our identity as an
> universal free software operating system.

I don't personally have a problem with such an approach. I for one saw
no reason though to manually unsubscribe from one perfectly fine list
just so I could manually subscribe to another list meant to serve the
same purpose as the first from what I understand.


On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:05:38PM -0500, Rob Owens wrote:
> A solution might be to:
> 
> 1)  rename this list if deemed necessary
> 2)  route all devuan-discuss emails to dng
> 
> This will combine the two lists without requiring users to make any
> changes.  If the name change is deemed necessary, the new name can be
> promoted on the website, but the old email addresses will continue to
> work.  At worst, existing users may need to update email filters to look
> for a "from address" of new_n...@devuan.org instead of dng@lists.dyne.org.

That sounds good to me as well.

Greg

-- 
web site: http://www.gregn.net
gpg public key: http://www.gregn.net/pubkey.asc
skype: gregn1
(authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)
If we haven't been in touch before, e-mail me before adding me to your contacts.

--
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-mana...@eu.org
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Rob Owens]

A solution might be to:

1)  rename this list if deemed necessary
2)  route all devuan-discuss emails to dng

This will combine the two lists without requiring users to make any
changes.  If the name change is deemed necessary, the new name can be
promoted on the website, but the old email addresses will continue to
work.  At worst, existing users may need to update email filters to look
for a "from address" of new_n...@devuan.org instead of dng@lists.dyne.org.

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Jaromil  wrote:

>
> One thing I learned from Permaculture design principles, which somehow
> deal very much with community and on many levels: never touch unless
> you have a reason to. A single "I don't like" is too subjective and
> won't ever become an executive reason nor decision. you can blow *me*
> away if I'll ever do that, just by being one of the many stewards
> having access to some servers.
>
> in order to leave space for our community to act organically, we'll
> follow this principle and change as less as possible. back to dng: its
> is an address we won't change just because one of us don't like it.
>
> meanwhile, the suggestion to notice devuan-discuss is good, lets do
> that. thanks hellekin for carefully updating the website!
> I also very much appreciate the talk.devuan.org documentation platform
> and it is true that's better communicated as such, rather than a forum
>
> at last, just like with the friendsofdevuan wiki and other platforms,
> if someone feels like volunteering time and gear to run a phpbb forum
> in a reliable way, we surely won't overlook it, but include it in the
> available options to get in touch and support it as we can. It can be
> a fun adventure, but beware it may become very big
>
>
> ciao
> ___
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@lists.dyne.org
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Jaromil]

One thing I learned from Permaculture design principles, which somehow
deal very much with community and on many levels: never touch unless
you have a reason to. A single "I don't like" is too subjective and
won't ever become an executive reason nor decision. you can blow *me*
away if I'll ever do that, just by being one of the many stewards
having access to some servers.

in order to leave space for our community to act organically, we'll
follow this principle and change as less as possible. back to dng: its
is an address we won't change just because one of us don't like it.

meanwhile, the suggestion to notice devuan-discuss is good, lets do
that. thanks hellekin for carefully updating the website!
I also very much appreciate the talk.devuan.org documentation platform
and it is true that's better communicated as such, rather than a forum

at last, just like with the friendsofdevuan wiki and other platforms,
if someone feels like volunteering time and gear to run a phpbb forum
in a reliable way, we surely won't overlook it, but include it in the
available options to get in touch and support it as we can. It can be
a fun adventure, but beware it may become very big


ciao
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[golinux]

On 2016-11-08 06:05, hellekin wrote:

On 11/06/2016 02:59 PM, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:


Based on these observations, I think the information on [2] should be
updated to tell DNG is the primary ML. devuan-discuss would better be
closed and all the subscribers informed that DNG is the primary ML for
getting help and discuss about Devuan, because it has always been and
people never switched to devuan-discuss.



The devuan-discuss mailing list was created to harmonize the lists:
devuan-announce, devuan-discuss, and devuan-dev, and to move away from
the "Debian is Not GNOME" antagonist pattern.

People never switched because there was no discussion about the 
identity

of Devuan.  All we know is that Devuan is not Debian.  But we can't
define our identity on a negative: Devuan has another energy than just
being opposed to a unequivocal way of thinking about free software.

I'm sad that people who were determined enough to switch distro would 
be

lazy enough to not jump ships and say: here we are, we are Devuan, and
we are not just against stuff.

I love the idea of having a history and roots, and that DNG is the 
heart
of our common ancestry.  I know people use email filters that have to 
be

updated in order to keep the sorting going.  But I hate thinking about
GNOME every time I post to DNG, for the simple reason that I have never
used it and do not feel concerned about opposing GNOME.  I'm sure it
works for a number of people, and I'm not part of them.

Don't you have a problem thinking about Devuan as "Debian without 
systemd"?


I know we're still early in the process of differentiation, but I'm
already pretty sure that what Devuan is becoming is not *in comparison
of* anything.  The fact we're receiving news of people making new
derivatives regularly should be much more important in our decision
making than any anti-foo bigotry.

So yes, devuan-discuss is not useful.  But contrary to what Jaromil
said, it was not a 'top-down' approach to create it: if it were,
everybody on DNG would have been subscribed to devuan-discuss and DNG
would have been closed and kept for historical reason, which is what
should happen if we really cared to think about our identity as an
universal free software operating system.

I understand Devuan as neither top-down nor bottom-up, but organic and
transversal. So I don't say bottom-up: I say topless.

Regards,

==
hk

P.S.: in the meantime I edited the web site to remove mention of
devuan-discuss to avoid confusion.  But I'd rather do the opposite, and
freeze DNG.




If this rationale had been presented before the executive decision was 
made to "harmonize" (tm codex-speak) the lists, this dislocation might 
have been avoided.  Perhaps we could reset and try again by asking for 
community feedback before a final decision is made?  Somehow, one 
executive decision overridden by yet another is not an improvement in 
community relations IMO.


My .02

golinux











___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Andrew McGlashan]

On 08/11/16 23:05, hellekin wrote:
> On 11/06/2016 02:59 PM, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
> P.S.: in the meantime I edited the web site to remove mention of
> devuan-discuss to avoid confusion.  But I'd rather do the opposite, and
> freeze DNG.

I agree with with you. DNG sounded to me like a temporary thing and I
considered devuan-discuss as being more like debian-user, but for Devuan
(specifically) and hopefully not moderated to stifle discussion and
[fraudulently] hide the facts of systemd displeasure from the masses.

The fact that devuan-discuss was not active was a real disappointment to
me and I wondered if I had jumped ship to the wrong alternative.

I too, most certainly think that going forward, then DNG list should be
abandoned in favour of Devuan specific lists.

Kind Regards
AndrewM



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[hellekin]

On 11/06/2016 02:59 PM, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
> 
> Based on these observations, I think the information on [2] should be
> updated to tell DNG is the primary ML. devuan-discuss would better be
> closed and all the subscribers informed that DNG is the primary ML for
> getting help and discuss about Devuan, because it has always been and
> people never switched to devuan-discuss.
>

The devuan-discuss mailing list was created to harmonize the lists:
devuan-announce, devuan-discuss, and devuan-dev, and to move away from
the "Debian is Not GNOME" antagonist pattern.

People never switched because there was no discussion about the identity
of Devuan.  All we know is that Devuan is not Debian.  But we can't
define our identity on a negative: Devuan has another energy than just
being opposed to a unequivocal way of thinking about free software.

I'm sad that people who were determined enough to switch distro would be
lazy enough to not jump ships and say: here we are, we are Devuan, and
we are not just against stuff.

I love the idea of having a history and roots, and that DNG is the heart
of our common ancestry.  I know people use email filters that have to be
updated in order to keep the sorting going.  But I hate thinking about
GNOME every time I post to DNG, for the simple reason that I have never
used it and do not feel concerned about opposing GNOME.  I'm sure it
works for a number of people, and I'm not part of them.

Don't you have a problem thinking about Devuan as "Debian without systemd"?

I know we're still early in the process of differentiation, but I'm
already pretty sure that what Devuan is becoming is not *in comparison
of* anything.  The fact we're receiving news of people making new
derivatives regularly should be much more important in our decision
making than any anti-foo bigotry.

So yes, devuan-discuss is not useful.  But contrary to what Jaromil
said, it was not a 'top-down' approach to create it: if it were,
everybody on DNG would have been subscribed to devuan-discuss and DNG
would have been closed and kept for historical reason, which is what
should happen if we really cared to think about our identity as an
universal free software operating system.

I understand Devuan as neither top-down nor bottom-up, but organic and
transversal. So I don't say bottom-up: I say topless.

Regards,

==
hk

P.S.: in the meantime I edited the web site to remove mention of
devuan-discuss to avoid confusion.  But I'd rather do the opposite, and
freeze DNG.

-- 
 _ _ We are free to share code and we code to share freedom
(_X_)yne Foundation, Free Culture Foundry * https://www.dyne.org/donate/
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Alessandro Selli]

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 at 09:31:31 +0100
Giovanni Rapagnani  wrote:

[...]

> devuan-discuss mailing list was created early May with the hope that

was created *in* early May

We might add "early May 2016", to let it stay relevant after May 2017.

> systemd-free living, Devuan issues and Devuan futur are carried on.

*future*

> during the last 6 months, there has been very few activity

very *little* activity



+1
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Giovanni Rapagnani]

link [1] is wrong, right one:
[1] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

On 08/11/16 09:31, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:



On 08/11/16 07:32, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:

I will update the webpage accordingly, indicating the talk.devuan.org
webforum and the DNG mailinglist as the main places for discussion,
but also the git.devuan.org issues as the place where to report bugs.


Once updated, it would probably be a good thing to inform the people on
devuan-discuss they'd better move to the DNG ml.


I wrote something, hopefully it is correct and will save time to the
person who will post it. You can of course improve the text. If it is
too bad, do not use it. Here it is:


Hello everyone,

As you probably know, Devuan is in beta phase, which means we are
bringing stability to the OS but also to the underlying infrastructure
and the communication channels required to make the project alive and
make it progress.

devuan-discuss mailing list was created early May with the hope that
people would step aboard and use it as the main place for debating on
Devuan specific issues.

However we did not anticipate that the early supporters of Devuan and
most knowledgeable people of our community would remain on DNG mailing
list instead of moving to devuan-discuss ml.

DNG is the first mailing list which was set up at the beginning of the
Devuan project. It is a very active list where discussions on
systemd-free living, Devuan issues and Devuan futur are carried on.

As a consequence, during the last 6 months, there has been very few
activity on devuan-discuss list and we have the feeling it is not worth
keeping it around.

We would like to discontinue devuan-discuss and would like to invite all
of you to join the broader community on DNG. Head over to the link at
[1] for subscribing to DNG mailing list.

Let me remind you that other communication channels are available and
presented on Devuan website [2]

[1] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devuan-discuss
[2] https://devuan.org/os/community
***

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Giovanni Rapagnani]

On 08/11/16 07:32, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:

I will update the webpage accordingly, indicating the talk.devuan.org
webforum and the DNG mailinglist as the main places for discussion,
but also the git.devuan.org issues as the place where to report bugs.


Once updated, it would probably be a good thing to inform the people on
devuan-discuss they'd better move to the DNG ml.


I wrote something, hopefully it is correct and will save time to the 
person who will post it. You can of course improve the text. If it is 
too bad, do not use it. Here it is:



Hello everyone,

As you probably know, Devuan is in beta phase, which means we are 
bringing stability to the OS but also to the underlying infrastructure 
and the communication channels required to make the project alive and 
make it progress.


devuan-discuss mailing list was created early May with the hope that 
people would step aboard and use it as the main place for debating on 
Devuan specific issues.


However we did not anticipate that the early supporters of Devuan and 
most knowledgeable people of our community would remain on DNG mailing 
list instead of moving to devuan-discuss ml.


DNG is the first mailing list which was set up at the beginning of the 
Devuan project. It is a very active list where discussions on 
systemd-free living, Devuan issues and Devuan futur are carried on.


As a consequence, during the last 6 months, there has been very few 
activity on devuan-discuss list and we have the feeling it is not worth 
keeping it around.


We would like to discontinue devuan-discuss and would like to invite all 
of you to join the broader community on DNG. Head over to the link at 
[1] for subscribing to DNG mailing list.


Let me remind you that other communication channels are available and 
presented on Devuan website [2]


[1] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devuan-discuss
[2] https://devuan.org/os/community
***

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Thomas Besser]

Am 07.11.2016 um 16:01 schrieb Hendrik Boom:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 03:33:26PM -0500, Dan Purgert wrote:
>>
>> Forums are fine and all, but since this list and IRC are decently
>> active, it may be a poor move to try pushing forums as well (given that
>> the "discuss" forum is pretty much dead in the water).
>>
>> Now, if there was a newsgroup ...
>>
> There is: gmane.linux.devuan.devel
> 
> You will have to point your newsreader to gmane.org
> 
> It is a bidirectional  mirror of this list.

Yes, I prefer always gmane before registering to a ML.

Can not found 'devuan-discuss' in gmane. Perhaps one more reason why it
had not so much traffic!?

Regards
Thomas


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Giovanni Rapagnani]

Dear Jaromil,

On 07/11/16 10:50, Jaromil wrote:

you are right, devuan-discuss never took off. it also did not receive
much love from any admin and I believe is stuck with some moderation
bit noone has attended. It is a failed plan which I suggest we
interpret as part of the "Beta" as much as other technical issues are.


It is a good think to remind that Beta phase also means the project is 
settling its infrastructure, its communication channels, ... It is not 
always obvious for everyone, me first.




I will update the webpage accordingly, indicating the talk.devuan.org
webforum and the DNG mailinglist as the main places for discussion,
but also the git.devuan.org issues as the place where to report bugs.


Once updated, it would probably be a good thing to inform the people on 
devuan-discuss they'd better move to the DNG ml.




as we are settling a meaningful communication architecture for all,
analysis and recommendations like yours are very welcome. We will also
think of a standard practice for requesting to open a new mailinglist,
something like a request backed by 10 or more active members and 2
volunteering for facilitation. I guess the devuan-discuss ml lacked
this sort of support, was thought and created top-down and therefore
it failed to take-off properly.


Thank you for sharing the plan and ideas on the futur communication 
channels.


I haven't been active on the ML however I am subscribed to it since the 
beginning and I have been following all of you since then.


Thanks to all the people who have invested their effort in Devuan so far.

Best regards,
Giovanni
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Dan Purgert]

On 11/07/2016 11:29 AM, Miroslav Rovis wrote:
> On 161107-10:38+0100, Edward Bartolo wrote:
>> This is one important reason why Devuan should have invested effort
>> into setting up a forum that uses an interface many would use readily.
>> I suggested phpBB like forums.debian.net. The reason given for not
>> choosing phpBB, as I understood it, was phpBB is too demanding on
>> servers.
> I may be only a future tester, but I very much miss the phpBB
> functionality of a good forum for Devuan.
> 
> It's many people who expect that, simply because it's the most common
> way to ask for and get help, and generally hand around in most distros
> of FOSS/GNU Linux...
> 
> No mailing list can, at least not in significant measure, replace
> that...

Forums are fine and all, but since this list and IRC are decently
active, it may be a poor move to try pushing forums as well (given that
the "discuss" forum is pretty much dead in the water).

Now, if there was a newsgroup ...



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Alessandro Selli]

On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 at 09:21:29 +0100 Giovanni Rapagnani 
wrote:

[...]

> The information 
> given on the community page of the website should reflect that fact, and 
> not erroneously tell people to subscribe to a ML where there is almost 
> no activity.

  Sounds to me the most rational thing to do.

Alessandro
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Miroslav Rovis]

On 161107-10:38+0100, Edward Bartolo wrote:
> This is one important reason why Devuan should have invested effort
> into setting up a forum that uses an interface many would use readily.
> I suggested phpBB like forums.debian.net. The reason given for not
> choosing phpBB, as I understood it, was phpBB is too demanding on
> servers.
I may be only a future tester, but I very much miss the phpBB
functionality of a good forum for Devuan.

It's many people who expect that, simply because it's the most common
way to ask for and get help, and generally hand around in most distros
of FOSS/GNU Linux...

No mailing list can, at least not in significant measure, replace
that...

> I remember when forums.debian.net was served from a "server" in a
> private house under a desk.
> http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=3331#p3331

That is one admirable moment in history! Thanks for the link!

-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Steve Litt]

On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 10:50:43 +0100
Jaromil  wrote:

> dear Giovanni,
> 
> On Mon, 07 Nov 2016, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
> > - on DNG ML: 145 different email addresses from 22 different time
> > zones have posted 3800 emails with an average of 633 emails/month  
> 
> [...]
> 
> > - on devuan-discuss: 21 different email addresses from 11 different
> > time zones have posted 58 emails with an average of 8 emails/month,
> > 4 emails were sent between Saturday 21:00 and Sunday 14:00 (local
> > time of the sender)  
> 
> thanks for your analysis and heads-up on the issue
> 
> you are right, devuan-discuss never took off. it also did not receive
> much love from any admin

DNG is a spectacular resource: I see no reason to balkanize our
community with alternatives. And, as I'll discuss in a post when I have
more time, for me, talk.devuan.org was a disaster.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
November 2016 featured book: Quit Joblessness: Start Your Own Business
http://www.troubleshooters.com/startbiz
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Rowland Penny]

On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 10:38:08 +0100
Edward Bartolo  wrote:

> This is one important reason why Devuan should have invested effort
> into setting up a forum that uses an interface many would use readily.
> I suggested phpBB like forums.debian.net. The reason given for not
> choosing phpBB, as I understood it, was phpBB is too demanding on
> servers.
> 
> I remember when forums.debian.net was served from a "server" in a
> private house under a desk.
> http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=3331#p3331
> 

You don't need a forum, a mailing list is good enough, provided it is
kept to the point.

Rowland
 
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Jaromil]

dear Giovanni,

On Mon, 07 Nov 2016, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
> - on DNG ML: 145 different email addresses from 22 different time zones have
> posted 3800 emails with an average of 633 emails/month

[...]

> - on devuan-discuss: 21 different email addresses from 11 different time
> zones have posted 58 emails with an average of 8 emails/month, 4 emails were
> sent between Saturday 21:00 and Sunday 14:00 (local time of the sender)

thanks for your analysis and heads-up on the issue

you are right, devuan-discuss never took off. it also did not receive
much love from any admin and I believe is stuck with some moderation
bit noone has attended. It is a failed plan which I suggest we
interpret as part of the "Beta" as much as other technical issues are.

I will update the webpage accordingly, indicating the talk.devuan.org
webforum and the DNG mailinglist as the main places for discussion,
but also the git.devuan.org issues as the place where to report bugs.

as we are settling a meaningful communication architecture for all,
analysis and recommendations like yours are very welcome. We will also
think of a standard practice for requesting to open a new mailinglist,
something like a request backed by 10 or more active members and 2
volunteering for facilitation. I guess the devuan-discuss ml lacked
this sort of support, was thought and created top-down and therefore
it failed to take-off properly.

best wishes

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Edward Bartolo]

This is one important reason why Devuan should have invested effort
into setting up a forum that uses an interface many would use readily.
I suggested phpBB like forums.debian.net. The reason given for not
choosing phpBB, as I understood it, was phpBB is too demanding on
servers.

I remember when forums.debian.net was served from a "server" in a
private house under a desk.
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=3331#p3331

-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.

Albert Einstein
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Bozonius]

On 06/11/16 17:40, Arnt Karlsen wrote:

..that's what we call Stupid Luck.  The next step is "when"
170 million voters write in Bernie Sanders for POTUŜ and Jill
Stein for VP on Tuesday... 
I may or may not agree with the former statement, but I think the latter 
falls more in the category of "miracle" than anything else!


But, alas, this is not the poly.sci mailing list...
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Rowland Penny]

On Mon, 7 Nov 2016 09:21:29 +0100
Giovanni Rapagnani  wrote:

> On 06/11/16 17:40, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > On Sun, 6 Nov 2016 17:14:39 +0100, Giovanni wrote in message
> > <5be642ae-c983-3ee3-db68-be1e7657a...@ideanet.be>:
> >
> >> On 06/11/16 15:20, KatolaZ wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 02:59:13PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani
> >>> wrote:
>  Based on the MLs description on [2], devuan-discuss is the
>  primary ML for requesting help and discuss about Devuan. That is
>  wrong! The fact is that DNG is the primary ML for such things.
> 
>  devuan-discuss is not useful and causing troubles: newcomers
>  don't get help; community is splits into 2 groups; ML activity
>  gives a bad perception about Devuan project activity.
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, but I don't get your point. The request you are talking
> >>> about was posted to devuan-discuss after 21:00 (CEST) on Saturday
> >>> 5th November. It is now Sunday 6th November, 14:16 CEST, so 17
> >>> long (weekend) hours have passed since that email appeared on
> >>> devuan-discuss. Believe it or not, people might actually have
> >>> something better (or simply different) to do during the week-end
> >>> than waiting in front of their email client to address problems
> >>> found by other users.
> >>
> >> That was an example. The same issue posted here received an answer
> >> after less than 20 minutes,
> >
> > ..that's what we call Stupid Luck.  The next step is "when"
> > 170 million voters write in Bernie Sanders for POTUŜ and Jill
> > Stein for VP on Tuesday...
> 
> Consider it Stupid Luck if you want.
> 
> For the period between 2 May 2016 and 31 October 2016, the numbers 
> (roughly) are:
> 
> - on DNG ML: 145 different email addresses from 22 different time
> zones have posted 3800 emails with an average of 633 emails/month
> 
> Among the 3800 emails, 258 emails were sent between Saturday 21:00
> and Sunday 14:00 (local time of the sender), i.e 7% of emails were
> sent during 10% of hours you can count in a week.
> 
> - on devuan-discuss: 21 different email addresses from 11 different
> time zones have posted 58 emails with an average of 8 emails/month, 4
> emails were sent between Saturday 21:00 and Sunday 14:00 (local time
> of the sender)
> 
> So, that was probably luck, but the chances to get a better answer
> and get it sooner are higher on DNG than devuan-discuss. The
> information given on the community page of the website should reflect
> that fact, and not erroneously tell people to subscribe to a ML where
> there is almost no activity.
> 
> If you are interested about the stats for DNG ML since 3 December
> 2014, see below.
> 
>   |   | different email
>month  | emails posted | addresses (i.e senders)
> ---
> Dec 2014 |772|121
> Jan 2015 |244|61
> Feb 2015 |867|96
> Mar 2015 |655|91
> Apr 2015 |498|83
> May 2015 |442|76
> Jun 2015 |470|81
> Jul 2015 |679|93
> Aug 2015 |830|85
> Sep 2015 |564|62
> Oct 2015 |323|61
> Nov 2015 |498|83
> Dec 2015 |786|88
> Jan 2016 |949|94
> Feb 2016 |689|82
> Mar 2016 |489|66
> Apr 2016 |707|81
> May 2016 |1036   |90
> Jun 2016 |873|74
> Jul 2016 |889|69
> Aug 2016 |702|65
> Sep 2016 |135|44
> Oct 2016 |165|46
> 
> For devuan-discuss, since 2 May 2016:
> 
>   |   | different email
>month  | emails posted | addresses (i.e senders)
> ---
> May 2016 |21 |9
> Jun 2016 |6  |5
> Jul 2016 |5  |4
> Aug 2016 |2  |2
> Sep 2016 |8  |4
> Oct 2016 |10 |5
> 
> 
> Giovanni
> 
> ___
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@lists.dyne.org
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


I think what the OP is trying to get at is, you have more chance of
getting an answer on this list. The big telling point for me is the
number of posts for August 2016, this list had 700 more posts than the
other list, which only had 2.
There is no point in directing new users to a list where they are
unlikely to get an answer.

Rowland
 
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Giovanni Rapagnani]

On 06/11/16 17:40, Arnt Karlsen wrote:

On Sun, 6 Nov 2016 17:14:39 +0100, Giovanni wrote in message
<5be642ae-c983-3ee3-db68-be1e7657a...@ideanet.be>:


On 06/11/16 15:20, KatolaZ wrote:

On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 02:59:13PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:

Based on the MLs description on [2], devuan-discuss is the primary
ML for requesting help and discuss about Devuan. That is wrong!
The fact is that DNG is the primary ML for such things.

devuan-discuss is not useful and causing troubles: newcomers don't
get help; community is splits into 2 groups; ML activity gives a
bad perception about Devuan project activity.


Sorry, but I don't get your point. The request you are talking about
was posted to devuan-discuss after 21:00 (CEST) on Saturday 5th
November. It is now Sunday 6th November, 14:16 CEST, so 17 long
(weekend) hours have passed since that email appeared on
devuan-discuss. Believe it or not, people might actually have
something better (or simply different) to do during the week-end
than waiting in front of their email client to address problems
found by other users.


That was an example. The same issue posted here received an answer
after less than 20 minutes,


..that's what we call Stupid Luck.  The next step is "when"
170 million voters write in Bernie Sanders for POTUŜ and Jill
Stein for VP on Tuesday...


Consider it Stupid Luck if you want.

For the period between 2 May 2016 and 31 October 2016, the numbers 
(roughly) are:


- on DNG ML: 145 different email addresses from 22 different time zones 
have posted 3800 emails with an average of 633 emails/month


Among the 3800 emails, 258 emails were sent between Saturday 21:00 and 
Sunday 14:00 (local time of the sender), i.e 7% of emails were sent 
during 10% of hours you can count in a week.


- on devuan-discuss: 21 different email addresses from 11 different time 
zones have posted 58 emails with an average of 8 emails/month, 4 emails 
were sent between Saturday 21:00 and Sunday 14:00 (local time of the sender)


So, that was probably luck, but the chances to get a better answer and 
get it sooner are higher on DNG than devuan-discuss. The information 
given on the community page of the website should reflect that fact, and 
not erroneously tell people to subscribe to a ML where there is almost 
no activity.


If you are interested about the stats for DNG ML since 3 December 2014, 
see below.


 |   | different email
  month  | emails posted | addresses (i.e senders)
---
Dec 2014 |772|121
Jan 2015 |244|61
Feb 2015 |867|96
Mar 2015 |655|91
Apr 2015 |498|83
May 2015 |442|76
Jun 2015 |470|81
Jul 2015 |679|93
Aug 2015 |830|85
Sep 2015 |564|62
Oct 2015 |323|61
Nov 2015 |498|83
Dec 2015 |786|88
Jan 2016 |949|94
Feb 2016 |689|82
Mar 2016 |489|66
Apr 2016 |707|81
May 2016 |1036   |90
Jun 2016 |873|74
Jul 2016 |889|69
Aug 2016 |702|65
Sep 2016 |135|44
Oct 2016 |165|46

For devuan-discuss, since 2 May 2016:

 |   | different email
  month  | emails posted | addresses (i.e senders)
---
May 2016 |21 |9
Jun 2016 |6  |5
Jul 2016 |5  |4
Aug 2016 |2  |2
Sep 2016 |8  |4
Oct 2016 |10 |5


Giovanni

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Arnt Karlsen]

On Sun, 6 Nov 2016 17:14:39 +0100, Giovanni wrote in message 
<5be642ae-c983-3ee3-db68-be1e7657a...@ideanet.be>:

> On 06/11/16 15:20, KatolaZ wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 02:59:13PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
> >> Based on the MLs description on [2], devuan-discuss is the primary
> >> ML for requesting help and discuss about Devuan. That is wrong!
> >> The fact is that DNG is the primary ML for such things.
> >>
> >> devuan-discuss is not useful and causing troubles: newcomers don't
> >> get help; community is splits into 2 groups; ML activity gives a
> >> bad perception about Devuan project activity.
> >
> > Sorry, but I don't get your point. The request you are talking about
> > was posted to devuan-discuss after 21:00 (CEST) on Saturday 5th
> > November. It is now Sunday 6th November, 14:16 CEST, so 17 long
> > (weekend) hours have passed since that email appeared on
> > devuan-discuss. Believe it or not, people might actually have
> > something better (or simply different) to do during the week-end
> > than waiting in front of their email client to address problems
> > found by other users.
> 
> That was an example. The same issue posted here received an answer
> after less than 20 minutes, 

..that's what we call Stupid Luck.  The next step is "when" 
170 million voters write in Bernie Sanders for POTUŜ and Jill 
Stein for VP on Tuesday...

..even if you win US $170 billion, you are still stuck on this planet.

> with at least a temporary solution
> within, while neither a solution nor a feedback was given on
> devuan-discuss yet.
> 
> DNG ML is a better place than devuan-discuss to get help, get
> feedback and gauge Devuan project activity. The website does tell
> another story. If people gauge Devuan project activity and community
> based on their interaction with devuan-discuss, they will probably be
> disappointed. I think it is harmful when it comes to attract more
> people inside the community. That is my point.
> 
> Giovanni


-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[Giovanni Rapagnani]

On 06/11/16 15:20, KatolaZ wrote:

On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 02:59:13PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:

Based on the MLs description on [2], devuan-discuss is the primary ML for
requesting help and discuss about Devuan. That is wrong! The fact is that
DNG is the primary ML for such things.

devuan-discuss is not useful and causing troubles: newcomers don't get help;
community is splits into 2 groups; ML activity gives a bad perception about
Devuan project activity.


Sorry, but I don't get your point. The request you are talking about
was posted to devuan-discuss after 21:00 (CEST) on Saturday 5th
November. It is now Sunday 6th November, 14:16 CEST, so 17 long
(weekend) hours have passed since that email appeared on
devuan-discuss. Believe it or not, people might actually have
something better (or simply different) to do during the week-end than
waiting in front of their email client to address problems found by
other users.


That was an example. The same issue posted here received an answer after 
less than 20 minutes, with at least a temporary solution within, while 
neither a solution nor a feedback was given on devuan-discuss yet.


DNG ML is a better place than devuan-discuss to get help, get feedback 
and gauge Devuan project activity. The website does tell another story. 
If people gauge Devuan project activity and community based on their 
interaction with devuan-discuss, they will probably be disappointed. I 
think it is harmful when it comes to attract more people inside the 
community. That is my point.


Giovanni

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] devuan-discuss is not useful, quite the opposite

[KatolaZ]

On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 02:59:13PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 

[cut]

> 
> Based on the MLs description on [2], devuan-discuss is the primary ML for
> requesting help and discuss about Devuan. That is wrong! The fact is that
> DNG is the primary ML for such things.
> 
> devuan-discuss is not useful and causing troubles: newcomers don't get help;
> community is splits into 2 groups; ML activity gives a bad perception about
> Devuan project activity.

Sorry, but I don't get your point. The request you are talking about
was posted to devuan-discuss after 21:00 (CEST) on Saturday 5th
November. It is now Sunday 6th November, 14:16 CEST, so 17 long
(weekend) hours have passed since that email appeared on
devuan-discuss. Believe it or not, people might actually have
something better (or simply different) to do during the week-end than
waiting in front of their email client to address problems found by
other users.

I understand nowadays this is hard to believe, but email is an
inherently *asynchronous* and *non-istantanoeus* communication
channel.

My2Cents

KatolaZ

-- 
[ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - GLUGCT -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
[ "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
[   @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
[ @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
[ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng