Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 20:23 +, robert burrell donkin wrote: On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 19:13 +, Stephen Colebourne wrote: Reposted (edited) from original commons proposal. Currently this proposal has general, though not unanimous, support. A vote thread may follow this thread if the mood remains positive. i'm a little unsure whether this will turn out for better or worse but if people out there have energy, i'm willing to give it a go. time's probably right for a little innovation and experimentation. i like the idea of tagging emails better: a single list with cool server side filtering and metrics. we don't have the technology for this yet so i'm willing to see the mailing lists split so long as people would be willing to consider coming back if it every arrives... I was just considering proposing exactly this! The issues about groupings, subprojects, etc. are completely irrelevant it seems to me. A community is the set of people subscribed to emails about a particular project, no more and no less. Unfortunately the way email lists are currently run at apache forces a strict hierarchy onto community structure, and forces a choice between coarse-grained and fine-grained style communities (eg one commons list vs one-per-project). PMCs are structured hierarchically, and that is reasonable, but communities don't need to be this way. The perfect system, to me, would be a website that allows a user to register a username/email-address; the process would confirm that the user's email address is valid. A set of checkboxes would allow a user to subscribe to various lists, or to virtual groupings such as jakarta commons which would implicitly subscribe to the list for every project that is tagged as being a jakarta-commons project. Of course this implies fine-grained email lists (ie one for each project); the problems of partitioning the subscriber base too much is avoided by the existence of the groupings. This system would allow overlapping groups to occur; for example commons-digester can be filed under both commons and xml virtual groups; someone subscribing to *either* group would receive digester-related emails. It also allows projects to move from one PMC to another without destroying the existing community (which *is* the set of people receiving emails). Groups also allow new projects to be created and added to the group; all people subscribed to the group would then automatically get emails related to that new project. Any list which has less than 3 subscribers would automatically forward its emails to the PMC list (or similar) for purposes of oversight. Any person subscribed to 3 or more projects associated with commons would automatically be subscribed to the whole commons group (or maybe just sent a weekly nag email recommending they do so). That hopefully allows casual commons developers to get just postings for one or two projects, without destroying the useful commons-wide community that exists now. Having a single point for managing subscriptions would also help greatly with something that regularly frustrates me: suspending subscription when I'm away on holiday. Currently, I need to unsubscribe to half-a-dozen lists then resubscribe on return. This sort of functionality probably already exists in one of the open-source mailing list management packages; it isn't anything radical as far as I can see. Cheers, Simon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On 3/14/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just considering proposing exactly this! The issues about groupings, subprojects, etc. are completely irrelevant it seems to me. A community is the set of people subscribed to emails about a particular project, no more and no less. Unfortunately the way email lists are currently run at apache forces a strict hierarchy onto community structure, and forces a choice between coarse-grained and fine-grained style communities (eg one commons list vs one-per-project). PMCs are structured hierarchically, and that is reasonable, but communities don't need to be this way. The perfect system, to me, would be a website that allows a user to register a username/email-address; the process would confirm that the user's email address is valid. A set of checkboxes would allow a user to subscribe to various lists, or to virtual groupings such as jakarta commons which would implicitly subscribe to the list for every project that is tagged as being a jakarta-commons project. Of course this implies fine-grained email lists (ie one for each project); the problems of partitioning the subscriber base too much is avoided by the existence of the groupings. This system would allow overlapping groups to occur; for example commons-digester can be filed under both commons and xml virtual groups; someone subscribing to *either* group would receive digester-related emails. It also allows projects to move from one PMC to another without destroying the existing community (which *is* the set of people receiving emails). Groups also allow new projects to be created and added to the group; all people subscribed to the group would then automatically get emails related to that new project. Any list which has less than 3 subscribers would automatically forward its emails to the PMC list (or similar) for purposes of oversight. Any person subscribed to 3 or more projects associated with commons would automatically be subscribed to the whole commons group (or maybe just sent a weekly nag email recommending they do so). That hopefully allows casual commons developers to get just postings for one or two projects, without destroying the useful commons-wide community that exists now. Having a single point for managing subscriptions would also help greatly with something that regularly frustrates me: suspending subscription when I'm away on holiday. Currently, I need to unsubscribe to half-a-dozen lists then resubscribe on return. This sort of functionality probably already exists in one of the open-source mailing list management packages; it isn't anything radical as far as I can see. Perhaps a forum frontend would be even better for users, at least for non-power-users. For instance, from what Patrick Lightbody told me about OpenQA, they have a system that is both a forum and a mailing list: any forum entry gets posted to the list, and any mail posted to the list appears in the forum (e.g. see the Selenium forum at http://forums.openqa.org/forum.jspa?forumID=3). I haven't used it myself yet, but I could ask him if there is interest in the technical details. cheers, Tom - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On 3/14/06, Thomas Dudziak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/14/06, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just considering proposing exactly this! The issues about groupings, subprojects, etc. are completely irrelevant it seems to me. A community is the set of people subscribed to emails about a particular project, no more and no less. Unfortunately the way email lists are currently run at apache forces a strict hierarchy onto community structure, and forces a choice between coarse-grained and fine-grained style communities (eg one commons list vs one-per-project). PMCs are structured hierarchically, and that is reasonable, but communities don't need to be this way. The perfect system, to me, would be a website that allows a user to register a username/email-address; the process would confirm that the user's email address is valid. A set of checkboxes would allow a user to subscribe to various lists, or to virtual groupings such as jakarta commons which would implicitly subscribe to the list for every project that is tagged as being a jakarta-commons project. Of course this implies fine-grained email lists (ie one for each project); the problems of partitioning the subscriber base too much is avoided by the existence of the groupings. This system would allow overlapping groups to occur; for example commons-digester can be filed under both commons and xml virtual groups; someone subscribing to *either* group would receive digester-related emails. It also allows projects to move from one PMC to another without destroying the existing community (which *is* the set of people receiving emails). Groups also allow new projects to be created and added to the group; all people subscribed to the group would then automatically get emails related to that new project. Any list which has less than 3 subscribers would automatically forward its emails to the PMC list (or similar) for purposes of oversight. Any person subscribed to 3 or more projects associated with commons would automatically be subscribed to the whole commons group (or maybe just sent a weekly nag email recommending they do so). That hopefully allows casual commons developers to get just postings for one or two projects, without destroying the useful commons-wide community that exists now. Having a single point for managing subscriptions would also help greatly with something that regularly frustrates me: suspending subscription when I'm away on holiday. Currently, I need to unsubscribe to half-a-dozen lists then resubscribe on return. This sort of functionality probably already exists in one of the open-source mailing list management packages; it isn't anything radical as far as I can see. Perhaps a forum frontend would be even better for users, at least for non-power-users. For instance, from what Patrick Lightbody told me about OpenQA, they have a system that is both a forum and a mailing list: any forum entry gets posted to the list, and any mail posted to the list appears in the forum (e.g. see the Selenium forum at http://forums.openqa.org/forum.jspa?forumID=3). I haven't used it myself yet, but I could ask him if there is interest in the technical details. That is a good idea. Forums don't work for extended team communication like mailing lists do. Mailing list don't work well for transient participants who only want to ask one question and then move on. You used to see this type of setup with mailing lists and news groups but news groups are all but dead to younger generations these days. -- Sandy McArthur He who dares not offend cannot be honest. - Thomas Paine - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On 3/14/06, Thomas Dudziak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps a forum frontend would be even better for users, at least for non-power-users. You mean like Nabble? (http://www.nabble.com) I like Simon's proposal. I know I need something that better allows me to manage the number of lists I'm on and a way to better filter converstations I'm interested in. Henri recently blogged something similar about a mailing list client: http://blog.generationjava.com/roller/page/bayard?entry=to_gmail_or_not_to -- jaaron - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On 3/14/06, J Aaron Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mean like Nabble? (http://www.nabble.com) Though I recently migrated my project (Floyd) to OpenQA, I don't exactly know my way around there yet. But I think they are using Jive (http://www.jivesoftware.com/). cheers, Tom - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
i like the idea of tagging emails better: a single list with cool server side filtering and metrics. we don't have the technology for this yet so i'm willing to see the mailing lists split so long as people would be willing to consider coming back if it every arrives... I was just considering proposing exactly this! A joke turns into something serious ...but I am all with you guys. As I said: the more I think about it - the more I like the idea! The another really cool feature with this tagging approach would be that cross-posting would no longer need to be banned - it would just not exist. A set of checkboxes would allow a user to subscribe to various lists, or to virtual groupings such as jakarta commons which would implicitly subscribe to the list for every project that is tagged as being a jakarta-commons project. Of course this implies fine-grained email lists (ie one for each project); the problems of partitioning the subscriber base too much is avoided by the existence of the groupings. Yepp! This system would allow overlapping groups to occur; for example commons-digester can be filed under both commons and xml virtual groups; someone subscribing to *either* group would receive digester-related emails. It also allows projects to move from one PMC to another without destroying the existing community (which *is* the set of people receiving emails). Great possibilites Groups also allow new projects to be created and added to the group; all people subscribed to the group would then automatically get emails related to that new project. Any list which has less than 3 subscribers would automatically forward its emails to the PMC list (or similar) for purposes of oversight. interesting Any person subscribed to 3 or more projects associated with commons would automatically be subscribed to the whole commons group (or maybe just sent a weekly nag email recommending they do so). That hopefully allows casual commons developers to get just postings for one or two projects, without destroying the useful commons-wide community that exists now. Having a single point for managing subscriptions would also help greatly with something that regularly frustrates me: suspending subscription when I'm away on holiday. Currently, I need to unsubscribe to half-a-dozen lists then resubscribe on return. Yepp! Another thing that would be awesome is to integrate it with a powerful archive system ...and then provide feeds for all the different tag combinations - and even individual threads! Man - that would be awesome! This sort of functionality probably already exists in one of the open-source mailing list management packages; it isn't anything radical as far as I can see. Now we only have to find such a project and then convince infrastructure ...regarding the forums - na. What does that help? I hate the fact I always have to subscribe to forums and never liked the interfaces. cheers -- Torsten smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On 3/14/06, Torsten Curdt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...regarding the forums - na. What does that help? Judging from myself, users don't like to have to subscribe to mailing lists, especially when they don't need the list on a daily basis. E.g. I would hate to get every question and answer in the Spring forums as mail. I'd much rather check the forums every once in a while. I hate the fact I always have to subscribe to forums and never liked the interfaces. You misunderstood: Patrick told me that the 'special' feature of the system that they use at OpenQA is that it can be used both as a mailing list (e.g. for the developers) and a forum (for the users if you want). Therefore, you'd register at a mailing list just as before and have nothing to do at all with the forum-view, but users could instead use the forum (and thus won't get all the - for them - noise). And the system automatically maps between the mailing list and the forum. That being said, I don't know how powerful the system is, e.g. if it would support a 'schema' like the tagging used for the commons mailing list ([beanutils], [lang], etc.) and would be able to sort mails into the corresponding forums automagically. Tom - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On 15.03.2006, at 10:10, Thomas Dudziak wrote: On 3/14/06, Torsten Curdt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...regarding the forums - na. What does that help? Judging from myself, users don't like to have to subscribe to mailing lists, especially when they don't need the list on a daily basis. E.g. I would hate to get every question and answer in the Spring forums as mail. I'd much rather check the forums every once in a while. Use Gmane ;) I am too lazy to always go and check forums. With the tagging approach you would only have to really subscribe once. ...and as I said - having feeds would be awesome. I hate the fact I always have to subscribe to forums and never liked the interfaces. You misunderstood: Patrick told me that the 'special' feature of the system that they use at OpenQA is that it can be used both as a mailing list (e.g. for the developers) and a forum (for the users if you want). Therefore, you'd register at a mailing list just as before and have nothing to do at all with the forum-view, but users could instead use the forum (and thus won't get all the - for them - noise). And the system automatically maps between the mailing list and the forum. I think what you are basically saying is you want a poll not a push service. IMO feeds are much better for that than a forum. But of course you could combine all these things. cheers -- Torsten smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Torsten Curdt wrote: On 15.03.2006, at 10:10, Thomas Dudziak wrote: On 3/14/06, Torsten Curdt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...regarding the forums - na. What does that help? Judging from myself, users don't like to have to subscribe to mailing lists, especially when they don't need the list on a daily basis. E.g. I would hate to get every question and answer in the Spring forums as mail. I'd much rather check the forums every once in a while. Use Gmane ;) I am too lazy to always go and check forums. With the tagging approach you would only have to really subscribe once. ...and as I said - having feeds would be awesome. I hate the fact I always have to subscribe to forums and never liked the interfaces. You misunderstood: Patrick told me that the 'special' feature of the system that they use at OpenQA is that it can be used both as a mailing list (e.g. for the developers) and a forum (for the users if you want). Therefore, you'd register at a mailing list just as before and have nothing to do at all with the forum-view, but users could instead use the forum (and thus won't get all the - for them - noise). And the system automatically maps between the mailing list and the forum. Basically Jive becomes a cool interface to the mailing list for those who like it - not an alternative set of threads. Patrick was showing it to me at ApacheCon - it seemed like a cool setup and he handled the various What ifs I threw at him (imagining the kinds of things that would come up on this list etc :) ). Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
Henri Yandell wrote: A joke turns into something serious ...but I am all with you guys. As I said: the more I think about it - the more I like the idea! You've got my +1 :) But is that what you mean? (+1 is active not passive) This all sounds like a nice idea, and could potentially solve the difficult issues and choices which we seem to be trying to make. But is it practical? Is there a tool out there that does this? Are there one or more people willing to drive this through and make it happen in the next three months? If its possible and is going to happen then we shouldn't do Jakarta Language Components. But if this idea isn't going to happen then JLC should be created. How will we make the decision? Stephen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Stephen Colebourne wrote: Henri Yandell wrote: A joke turns into something serious ...but I am all with you guys. As I said: the more I think about it - the more I like the idea! You've got my +1 :) But is that what you mean? (+1 is active not passive) It is what I mean, though it's contextual (is for all of us). In my case it's: If someone were to dig into this and find or create a solution, I would actively test it, hassle infra/whomever, throw in ideas and do a little coding - but I'm not going to be much use if a large chunk of time to code/design is required. This all sounds like a nice idea, and could potentially solve the difficult issues and choices which we seem to be trying to make. But is it practical? Is there a tool out there that does this? Are there one or more people willing to drive this through and make it happen in the next three months? If its possible and is going to happen then we shouldn't do Jakarta Language Components. But if this idea isn't going to happen then JLC should be created. How will we make the decision? It's nice to talk - Robert's mentioned the idea in the past so it's good to have more brains thinking on the idea; however I wouldn't let it get in the way of simpler ideas for dealing with the current state. Presuming it involves a large buy in from the foundation - ie) not something we could do on our own - I'd factor in 6 months to a year to get that large a group moving :) Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Managing communities and emails (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Jakarta Language Components)
Hey... I know what this could be called... Alexandria Henri Yandell wrote: On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Stephen Colebourne wrote: Henri Yandell wrote: A joke turns into something serious ...but I am all with you guys. As I said: the more I think about it - the more I like the idea! You've got my +1 :) But is that what you mean? (+1 is active not passive) It is what I mean, though it's contextual (is for all of us). In my case it's: If someone were to dig into this and find or create a solution, I would actively test it, hassle infra/whomever, throw in ideas and do a little coding - but I'm not going to be much use if a large chunk of time to code/design is required. This all sounds like a nice idea, and could potentially solve the difficult issues and choices which we seem to be trying to make. But is it practical? Is there a tool out there that does this? Are there one or more people willing to drive this through and make it happen in the next three months? If its possible and is going to happen then we shouldn't do Jakarta Language Components. But if this idea isn't going to happen then JLC should be created. How will we make the decision? It's nice to talk - Robert's mentioned the idea in the past so it's good to have more brains thinking on the idea; however I wouldn't let it get in the way of simpler ideas for dealing with the current state. Presuming it involves a large buy in from the foundation - ie) not something we could do on our own - I'd factor in 6 months to a year to get that large a group moving :) Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
