Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
As I mentioned before, numpy-related questions would be welcome on scicomp, and this would have the advantage of bringing in scientists and mathematicians from related fields who might be able to answer numerical questions that sit between mathematics, programming, and science that you might not otherwise. There's already somewhat of a critical mass of people hanging out at scicomp (500 unique visitors a day during the work week), and you can subscribe to the python-related tags if you want to filter out the other sorts of questions. A ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
+1 on scicomp.stackexchange.com For it to work, one would need to actively push users towards it though...so it would require a very clear pronouncement. Matthew: I'm happy with the split we did with Cython. It leaves me free to mostly ignore cython-users, and it saves users from thos 100+ post threads about inner workings. (I've had Cython users tell me several times that it is better that devs make Cython better than spend time helping newbies -- I feel helping out newbies is something advanced users can do too). I don't agree with your implication that the organization of mailing lists has much to do with governance. The mailing list split is a split of topics of discussion, not of the subscribers; anyone is welcome to post on cython-dev (e.g., ideas for new features or hashing out wanted semantics). However, a stackexchange-like solution may be a better fit than a users list. The. ask.scipy beta wasn't used much but it wasn't really promoted and users weren't pushed towards it. One advantage is pooling topics together; many new users may be unsure whether numpy or scipy or matplotlib or ipython or cython is the place to ask. There are 'inter-disiplinery' questions; currently numpy-discussion seems to catch some of that too, not just pure numpy. Dag -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. Aron Ahmadia a...@ahmadia.net wrote: As I mentioned before, numpy-related questions would be welcome on scicomp, and this would have the advantage of bringing in scientists and mathematicians from related fields who might be able to answer numerical questions that sit between mathematics, programming, and science that you might not otherwise. There's already somewhat of a critical mass of people hanging out at scicomp (500 unique visitors a day during the work week), and you can subscribe to the python-related tags if you want to filter out the other sorts of questions. A ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote: +1 on scicomp.stackexchange.com For it to work, one would need to actively push users towards it though...so it would require a very clear pronouncement. Matthew: I'm happy with the split we did with Cython. It leaves me free to mostly ignore cython-users, and it saves users from thos 100+ post threads about inner workings. (I've had Cython users tell me several times that it is better that devs make Cython better than spend time helping newbies -- I feel helping out newbies is something advanced users can do too). Having heard from you and Fernando, I'm much more 50 - 50 than I was before. Although my experience is the same as TJ earlier - I don't filter my mail, I just skip the ones I don't want to read, often by subject line or the first few lines of the mail. I don't agree with your implication that the organization of mailing lists has much to do with governance. I think 'governance' would be a bad word for what I meant - more like 'tone'. I suppose they are strongly related but probably 'tone' comes first and then drives 'governance', and maybe the purpose of 'governance' is to preserve the 'tone' as people and circumstances change. The mailing list split is a split of topics of discussion, not of the subscribers; anyone is welcome to post on cython-dev (e.g., ideas for new features or hashing out wanted semantics). Right. However, a stackexchange-like solution may be a better fit than a users list. The. ask.scipy beta wasn't used much but it wasn't really promoted and users weren't pushed towards it. As a matter of interest - do y'all hang out much on stackexchange? I notice that I often go to stackexchange for a good answer, but it doesn't seem that good for - discussion. Or maybe it's just I'm not used to it. One advantage is pooling topics together; many new users may be unsure whether numpy or scipy or matplotlib or ipython or cython is the place to ask. There are 'inter-disiplinery' questions; currently numpy-discussion seems to catch some of that too, not just pure numpy. Yes, good point. See you, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: As a matter of interest - do y'all hang out much on stackexchange? I notice that I often go to stackexchange for a good answer, but it doesn't seem that good for - discussion. Or maybe it's just I'm not used to it. I'm in the same boat as you, but this discussion has made me much more interested in starting to use it, and it sounds like it might really be a better solution for the kind of 'cross-project' questions that often feel a bit out of place in just about all the lists. People have made pretty convincinge (to me) arguments for that kind of system, perhaps we should give it a try instead of opening yet another ML... Cheers, f ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On 6/30/12 12:10 PM, Fernando Perez wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Matthew Brettmatthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: As a matter of interest - do y'all hang out much on stackexchange? I notice that I often go to stackexchange for a good answer, but it doesn't seem that good for - discussion. Or maybe it's just I'm not used to it. I'm in the same boat as you, but this discussion has made me much more interested in starting to use it I'm curious: do you mean using stackexchange.com itself, or using http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/ specifically? Thanks, Jason ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: I'm curious: do you mean using stackexchange.com itself, or using http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/ specifically? I meant the latter, which seems like it would be the best suited for the topic of this discussion. I don't use the site myself yet (other than, as Matthew mentions, stumbling on it via googling for a question), but I'm growing more interested... Cheers, f ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On 06/30/2012 07:31 PM, Fernando Perez wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: I'm curious: do you mean using stackexchange.com itself, or using http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/ specifically? I meant the latter, which seems like it would be the best suited for the topic of this discussion. I don't use the site myself yet (other than, as Matthew mentions, stumbling on it via googling for a question), but I'm growing more interested... It is rumored that a problem with some stackexchange sites is the host of nay-sayers saying that a question doesn't belong here but in this other silo instead, instead of just letting a culture develop (though my only interface to stack*.com is Google too so I don't really know). If one was to actively push people to that site instead of numpy-discussion, one should make sure that almost any discussion about scientific Python is welcome there (at least anything that does import numpy at some point). Perhaps have that discussion on meta.scicomp.stackexchange.com beforehand. Dag ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote: It is rumored that a problem with some stackexchange sites is the host of nay-sayers saying that a question doesn't belong here but in this other silo instead, instead of just letting a culture develop (though my only interface to stack*.com is Google too so I don't really know). Mmh, interesting... Not being a regular user myself, I have no idea. But it does sound like something worth clarifying before starting to push discussions in that direction. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On 06/30/2012 08:44 PM, Fernando Perez wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote: It is rumored that a problem with some stackexchange sites is the host of nay-sayers saying that a question doesn't belong here but in this other silo instead, instead of just letting a culture develop (though my only interface to stack*.com is Google too so I don't really know). Mmh, interesting... Not being a regular user myself, I have no idea. But it does sound like something worth clarifying before starting to push discussions in that direction. Specifically: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4131462 But I see that Aron and Andy seem to have some authority on meta.scicomp so it can't be too bad on scicomp...? Dag ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
I and Geoff are moderators on scicomp, I'm happy to invest the effort in getting the community started there. One way to use scicomp is like a blog/faq, that is, if you get a specific question a lot here on the list or elsewhere, you can ask and answer it yourself on scicomp. If others find the post useful, they will vote it and the answer up. Navel-gazing questions with generic scope are generally discouraged, for a good feel for the sort of questions we'd be able to handle from a scipy/numpy perspective on scicomp, take a look at either the petsc or python tag feeds: http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/petsc?sort=activepagesize=15 http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/python?sort=activepagesize=15 A On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote: On 06/30/2012 08:44 PM, Fernando Perez wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote: It is rumored that a problem with some stackexchange sites is the host of nay-sayers saying that a question doesn't belong here but in this other silo instead, instead of just letting a culture develop (though my only interface to stack*.com is Google too so I don't really know). Mmh, interesting... Not being a regular user myself, I have no idea. But it does sound like something worth clarifying before starting to push discussions in that direction. Specifically: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4131462 But I see that Aron and Andy seem to have some authority on meta.scicomp so it can't be too bad on scicomp...? Dag ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Jim Vickroy jim.vick...@noaa.gov wrote: As a lurker and user, I too wish for a distinct numpy-users list. -- jv This thread is a perfect example of why another list is needed. It's currently 42 semi-philosophical posts about what kind community numpy should be and what kinds of lists or stacks should serve it. There needs to be a place where people can ask simple 'how do I do x in numpy questions without having to wade through hundreds of posts about release cycles, community input, process, and decisions about ABI and API compatibility in point versus major releases. Most people just don't care -- they just want to be reasonably sure that the developers do care and are doing it right. And if they want to participate or observe these discussions, they know where to go. It's like sausage making -- the more people get an inside look at how the sausage is made, the more they are afraid to eat it. In mpl we have a devel list and a users list. Preparing for a release, we might have a hundred emails about PR status and breakers and release cycles and god knows what. The users list gets rc1 is ready for testing, rc2 is ready for testing and v1.1.1 is released. That's about all most people want to know about our release process. JDH ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:29 PM, John Hunter jdh2...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Jim Vickroy jim.vick...@noaa.gov wrote: As a lurker and user, I too wish for a distinct numpy-users list. -- jv This thread is a perfect example of why another list is needed. It's currently 42 semi-philosophical posts about what kind community numpy should be and what kinds of lists or stacks should serve it. There needs to be a place where people can ask simple 'how do I do x in numpy questions without having to wade through hundreds of posts about release cycles, community input, process, and decisions about ABI and API compatibility in point versus major releases. Oh - dear. I think the point that most of us agreed on was that having a different from: address wasn't a perfect solution for giving people space for asking newbie type questions. No-one has to read an email. If it looks boring or silly or irrelevant to your concerns, well, then ignore it. Most people just don't care -- they just want to be reasonably sure that the developers do care and are doing it right. And if they want to participate or observe these discussions, they know where to go. It's like sausage making -- the more people get an inside look at how the sausage is made, the more they are afraid to eat it. Not so in general. The more I hang out on the cython / sympy / ipython mailing lists, the more I feel like using and (if I can) contributing. In mpl we have a devel list and a users list. Preparing for a release, we might have a hundred emails about PR status and breakers and release cycles and god knows what. The users list gets rc1 is ready for testing, rc2 is ready for testing and v1.1.1 is released. That's about all most people want to know about our release process. I can see an argument for numpy-announce. Best, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On 06/30/2012 09:37 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: Hi, On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:29 PM, John Hunterjdh2...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Jim Vickroyjim.vick...@noaa.gov wrote: As a lurker and user, I too wish for a distinct numpy-users list. -- jv This thread is a perfect example of why another list is needed. It's currently 42 semi-philosophical posts about what kind community numpy should be and what kinds of lists or stacks should serve it. There needs to be a place where people can ask simple 'how do I do x in numpy questions without having to wade through hundreds of posts about release cycles, community input, process, and decisions about ABI and API compatibility in point versus major releases. Oh - dear. I think the point that most of us agreed on was that having a different from: address wasn't a perfect solution for giving people space for asking newbie type questions. No-one has to read an email. If it looks boring or silly or irrelevant to your concerns, well, then ignore it. I'd think most users sort different mailing lists into folders/tags/... automatically, not into their main inbox. Ignoring an email takes time; if I actually had to read the title of each thread of all the mailing lists I'm subscribed to it'd cost me a significant amount of time. Most people just don't care -- they just want to be reasonably sure that the developers do care and are doing it right. And if they want to participate or observe these discussions, they know where to go. It's like sausage making -- the more people get an inside look at how the sausage is made, the more they are afraid to eat it. Not so in general. The more I hang out on the cython / sympy / ipython mailing lists, the more I feel like using and (if I can) contributing. John specifically says most people. You (and I) are not most people. Dag ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote: On 06/30/2012 09:37 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: Hi, On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:29 PM, John Hunterjdh2...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Jim Vickroyjim.vick...@noaa.gov wrote: As a lurker and user, I too wish for a distinct numpy-users list. -- jv This thread is a perfect example of why another list is needed. It's currently 42 semi-philosophical posts about what kind community numpy should be and what kinds of lists or stacks should serve it. There needs to be a place where people can ask simple 'how do I do x in numpy questions without having to wade through hundreds of posts about release cycles, community input, process, and decisions about ABI and API compatibility in point versus major releases. Oh - dear. I think the point that most of us agreed on was that having a different from: address wasn't a perfect solution for giving people space for asking newbie type questions. No-one has to read an email. If it looks boring or silly or irrelevant to your concerns, well, then ignore it. I'd think most users sort different mailing lists into folders/tags/... automatically, not into their main inbox. Ignoring an email takes time; if I actually had to read the title of each thread of all the mailing lists I'm subscribed to it'd cost me a significant amount of time. Most people just don't care -- they just want to be reasonably sure that the developers do care and are doing it right. And if they want to participate or observe these discussions, they know where to go. It's like sausage making -- the more people get an inside look at how the sausage is made, the more they are afraid to eat it. Not so in general. The more I hang out on the cython / sympy / ipython mailing lists, the more I feel like using and (if I can) contributing. John specifically says most people. You (and I) are not most people. Heads up - navel gazing alert. Read no further if you feel sick looking at navels. It's very obvious to some people on this thread that a user mailing list is necessary. It's less obvious to others. I personally don't think it's clear cut and there are arguments both ways. We each of us base our opinions and arguments on our experience. We were all 'users' once, as many of us were students once. I'm a 'user' of Cython, and Sympy and IPython. Like the rest of us, I'm trying to work out what I, as a user, would want, at the same time as wishing for the best community for numpy. Best, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
just some statistics http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/numpy 769 followers, 2,850 questions tagged a guess: average response time for regular usage question far less than an hour http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/scipy 446 followers, 991questions tagged http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/matplotlib 438 followers, 1,861 questions tagged ... http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/ipython 395 questions tagged http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/pandas 91 followers, 174 questions tagged I'm only watching numpy and scipy, but mainly for unanswered questions because the fast response team is fast. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/r 2.5k followers, 14,057 questions tagged they also ask additional questions so they can build up a FAQ Josef ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:26 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: just some statistics http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/numpy 769 followers, 2,850 questions tagged a guess: average response time for regular usage question far less than an hour http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/scipy 446 followers, 991questions tagged Yes they are frequently very quick and pinpoint. To provide yet another data point, I will mention that I used to be an avid follower of comp.text.tex. I would post questions there and also read it for knowledge. Now, I use http://tex.stackexchange.com/ almost exclusively. I know many others have done the same. I've also noticed a number of LaTeX gurus using the stackexchange site more and more. Try googling a LaTeX (esp TikZ) question. Would you rather read through an archived newsgroup (mailing list in NumPy's case) or have a webpage with useful features, embedded images, etc? jdh noticed this as well: the majority of the messages to numpy-discussion in the last 2 months have not been usage questions but decisions, releases, debates, etc. Personally, I would push for the stackexchange solution over a 'user' mailing list. That said, comp.text.tex and tex.stackexchange.com coexist just fine---it just means there is redudnancy and not the good kind IMO. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 2:29 PM, John Hunter jdh2...@gmail.com wrote: This thread is a perfect example of why another list is needed. +1 On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: Oh - dear. I think the point that most of us agreed on was that having a different from: address wasn't a perfect solution for giving people space for asking newbie type questions. No-one has to read an email. If it looks boring or silly or irrelevant to your concerns, well, then ignore it. Looking at the same mails, it doesn't seem to me that most of us have agreed on that. It seems most have us have expressed that they will be satisfied with two different lists but are open about considering the stackoverflow model. The latter will require more work and time to get it going copmpared to the former. Aside: A logical conclusion of your dont read mails that dont interest you would be that spam is not a problem, after all no one has to read spam. If it looks boring or silly or irrelevant to your concerns, well, then ignore it. On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4131462 It seems it was mostly driven an argumentative troll, who had decided beforehand to disagree with some of the other folks and went about cooking up interpretations so that he/she can complain about them. Sadly, this list shows such tendencies at times as well. Anecdotal data-point: I have been happy with SO in general. It works for certain types of queries very well. OTOH if the answer to the question is known only to a few and he/she does not happen to be online at time the question was posted, and he/she does not pull such possible questions by key-words, that question is all but history. The difference is that on a mailing list questions are pushed on to people who might be able to answer it, whereas in SO model people have to actively seek questions they want to answer. Unanticipated, niche questions tend to disappear. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:50 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: Anecdotal data-point: I have been happy with SO in general. It works for certain types of queries very well. OTOH if the answer to the question is known only to a few and he/she does not happen to be online at time the question was posted, and he/she does not pull such possible questions by key-words, that question is all but history. The difference is that on a mailing list questions are pushed on to people who might be able to answer it, whereas in SO model people have to actively seek questions they want to answer. Unanticipated, niche questions tend to disappear. Isn't that what the various sections are for? http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=newest http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=unanswered And then, if you want modification-by-modification updates: http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=active Entries are sorted by date and you can view as many pages worth as are available. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 5:02 PM, T J tjhn...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:50 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: Anecdotal data-point: I have been happy with SO in general. It works for certain types of queries very well. OTOH if the answer to the question is known only to a few and he/she does not happen to be online at time the question was posted, and he/she does not pull such possible questions by key-words, that question is all but history. The difference is that on a mailing list questions are pushed on to people who might be able to answer it, whereas in SO model people have to actively seek questions they want to answer. Unanticipated, niche questions tend to disappear. Isn't that what the various sections are for? http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=newest http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=unanswered also by tag http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/scipy?sort=unansweredpagesize=50 sparse knowledge is scarse Josef And then, if you want modification-by-modification updates: http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=active Entries are sorted by date and you can view as many pages worth as are available. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Isn't that what the various sections are for? Indeed they are, but it still needs active pulling on behalf of those who would want to answer questions and even then a question can sink deep in the well. Deeper than what one typically monitors. Sometimes question are not appropriately tagged. Sometimes it is not obvious what the tag should be, or which tag is being monitored by the persons who might have the answer. Could be less of a problem for us given that its a more focused group and the predefined tags are not split too fine. I think the main issue is that SO requires more active engagement than a mailing list because checking for new mail has become something that almost everyone does by default anyway. Not saying SO is bad, I have benefited greatly from it, but this issues should be kept in mind. http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=newest http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=unanswered And then, if you want modification-by-modification updates: http://stackoverflow.com/questions?sort=active Entries are sorted by date and you can view as many pages worth as are available. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On 6/30/12 4:23 PM, srean wrote: Indeed they are, but it still needs active pulling on behalf of those who would want to answer questions and even then a question can sink deep in the well. Deeper than what one typically monitors. Sometimes question are not appropriately tagged. Sometimes it is not obvious what the tag should be, or which tag is being monitored by the persons who might have the answer. Could be less of a problem for us given that its a more focused group and the predefined tags are not split too fine. I think the main issue is that SO requires more active engagement than a mailing list because checking for new mail has become something that almost everyone does by default anyway. Not saying SO is bad, I have benefited greatly from it, but this issues should be kept in mind. You can subscribe to be notified by email whenever a question is posted to a certain tag. So then it is no different than a mailing list as far as push/pull. As far as mistagging---that is no different than posting to the wrong mailing list, so I don't see how that is an extra problem. In fact, since it's easy to switch the tags, it's easier than a mailing list to shuttle a question to the right mailing list/tag. Thanks, Jason -- Jason Grout ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
You can subscribe to be notified by email whenever a question is posted to a certain tag. Absolutely true. So then it is no different than a mailing list as far as push/pull. There are a few differences though. New tags get created often, potentially in a decentralized fashion and dynamically, way more often than creation of lists. Thats why the need to actively monitor. Another is in frequency of subscription, how often does a user of SO subscribe to a tag. Yet another is that tags are usually are much more specific than a typical charter of a mailing list and thats a good thing because it makes things easier to find nd browse. I think if the tags are kept broad enough (or it is ensured that finer tags inherit from broader tags. For example numpy.foo where foo can be created according to the existing SO rules of tag creation ) and participants here are willing to subscribe to those tags, there wont be much of a difference. So, just two qualifiers. In addition if there is a way to bounce-n-answer user questions posted here to the SO forum relatively painlessy that will be quite nice too. May be something that creates a new user based on user's mail id, mails him/her the response and a password with which he/she can take control of the id. It is more polite and may be a good way for the SO site to collect more users. Best --srean ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
As a lurker and user, I too wish for a distinct numpy-users list. -- jv
On 6/28/2012 1:42 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Olivier Delalleau sh...@keba.be wrote:
+1 for a numpy-users list without dev noise.
Moderately strong vote against splitting the mailing lists into devel and
user.
As we know, this list can be unhappy and distracting, but I don't
think splitting the lists is the right approach to that problem.
Splitting the lists sends the wrong signal. I'd rather that we show
by example that the developers listen to all voices, and that the
users should expect to become developers. In other words that the
boundary between the user and developer is fluid and has no explicit
boundaries.
As data points, I make no distinction between scipy-devel and
scipy-user, nor cython-devel and cython-user. Policing the
distinction ('please post this on the user mailing list') is a boring
job and doesn't make anyone more cheerful.
I don't believe help questions are getting lost any more than devel
questions are, but I'm happy to be corrected if someone has some data.
Cheers,
Matthew
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
We try to support numpy questions on http://scicomp.stackexchange.com, which is a StackOverflow site dedicated towards technical computing issues that gets a fair amount of traffic from mathematicians and computational scientists. We could always use more questions and answerers :) A On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 6:38 AM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, this has been brought up several times, and the response has been generally positive but it has fallen through the cracks. So here are a few repeat requests. Am keeping it terse just for brevity i) Split the list into [devel] and [help] and as was mentioned recently [rant/flame]: some request for help get drowned out during active development related discussions and simple help requests pollutes more urgent development related matters. ii) Stackoverflow like site for help as well as for proposals. The silent majority has been referred to a few times recently. I suspect there does exist many lurkers on the list who do prefer one discussed solution over the other but for various reasons do not break out of their lurk mode to send a mail saying I prefer this solution. Such an interface will also help in keeping track of the level of support as compared to mails that are larges hunks of quoted text with a line or two stating ones preference or seconding a proposal. One thing I have learned from traffic accidents is that if one asks for a help of the assembled crowd, no one knows how to respond. On the other hand if you say hey there in a blue shirt could you get some water you get instant results. So pardon me for taking the presumptuous liberty to request Travis to please set it up or delegate. Splitting the lists shouldn't be hard work, setting up overflow might be more work in comparison. Best -- srean ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
There are some good ideas here. I propose splitting this list into devel and users lists. This might best be done by creating a new list for users and using this list for development. Travis -- Travis Oliphant (on a mobile) 512-826-7480 On Jun 27, 2012, at 11:38 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, this has been brought up several times, and the response has been generally positive but it has fallen through the cracks. So here are a few repeat requests. Am keeping it terse just for brevity i) Split the list into [devel] and [help] and as was mentioned recently [rant/flame]: some request for help get drowned out during active development related discussions and simple help requests pollutes more urgent development related matters. ii) Stackoverflow like site for help as well as for proposals. The silent majority has been referred to a few times recently. I suspect there does exist many lurkers on the list who do prefer one discussed solution over the other but for various reasons do not break out of their lurk mode to send a mail saying I prefer this solution. Such an interface will also help in keeping track of the level of support as compared to mails that are larges hunks of quoted text with a line or two stating ones preference or seconding a proposal. One thing I have learned from traffic accidents is that if one asks for a help of the assembled crowd, no one knows how to respond. On the other hand if you say hey there in a blue shirt could you get some water you get instant results. So pardon me for taking the presumptuous liberty to request Travis to please set it up or delegate. Splitting the lists shouldn't be hard work, setting up overflow might be more work in comparison. Best -- srean ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
+1 for a numpy-users list without dev noise. -=- Olivier 2012/6/28 Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io There are some good ideas here. I propose splitting this list into devel and users lists. This might best be done by creating a new list for users and using this list for development. Travis -- Travis Oliphant (on a mobile) 512-826-7480 On Jun 27, 2012, at 11:38 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, this has been brought up several times, and the response has been generally positive but it has fallen through the cracks. So here are a few repeat requests. Am keeping it terse just for brevity i) Split the list into [devel] and [help] and as was mentioned recently [rant/flame]: some request for help get drowned out during active development related discussions and simple help requests pollutes more urgent development related matters. ii) Stackoverflow like site for help as well as for proposals. The silent majority has been referred to a few times recently. I suspect there does exist many lurkers on the list who do prefer one discussed solution over the other but for various reasons do not break out of their lurk mode to send a mail saying I prefer this solution. Such an interface will also help in keeping track of the level of support as compared to mails that are larges hunks of quoted text with a line or two stating ones preference or seconding a proposal. One thing I have learned from traffic accidents is that if one asks for a help of the assembled crowd, no one knows how to respond. On the other hand if you say hey there in a blue shirt could you get some water you get instant results. So pardon me for taking the presumptuous liberty to request Travis to please set it up or delegate. Splitting the lists shouldn't be hard work, setting up overflow might be more work in comparison. Best -- srean ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Le jeudi 28 juin 2012 15:33:07, Travis Oliphant a écrit : There are some good ideas here. I propose splitting this list into devel and users lists. This might best be done by creating a new list for users and using this list for development. I second that idea. As one of the silent users of the list, with not (so) much interest in the details of the development (and even less in the public display of personal dislikes , I'd be happy to switch to a more users-oriented list. Éric. Travis -- Travis Oliphant (on a mobile) 512-826-7480 On Jun 27, 2012, at 11:38 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, this has been brought up several times, and the response has been generally positive but it has fallen through the cracks. So here are a few repeat requests. Am keeping it terse just for brevity i) Split the list into [devel] and [help] and as was mentioned recently [rant/flame]: some request for help get drowned out during active development related discussions and simple help requests pollutes more urgent development related matters. ii) Stackoverflow like site for help as well as for proposals. The silent majority has been referred to a few times recently. I suspect there does exist many lurkers on the list who do prefer one discussed solution over the other but for various reasons do not break out of their lurk mode to send a mail saying I prefer this solution. Such an interface will also help in keeping track of the level of support as compared to mails that are larges hunks of quoted text with a line or two stating ones preference or seconding a proposal. One thing I have learned from traffic accidents is that if one asks for a help of the assembled crowd, no one knows how to respond. On the other hand if you say hey there in a blue shirt could you get some water you get instant results. So pardon me for taking the presumptuous liberty to request Travis to please set it up or delegate. Splitting the lists shouldn't be hard work, setting up overflow might be more work in comparison. Best -- srean ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion -- Un clavier azerty en vaut deux -- Éric Depagnee...@depagne.org ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Similar to http://scicomp.stackexchange.com there is http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ intended for programmers. Darn it, there are choices involved! I had proposed http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ on this mailing list earlier and no-one seemed interested, but maybe now the time is right. Kindest regards, Tim ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Did you mean http://programmers.stackexchange.com? The meta sites on *. stackexchange.com are used (as one might guess) for meta discussions on the site. A On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Cera, Tim t...@cerazone.net wrote: Similar to http://scicomp.stackexchange.com there is http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ intended for programmers. Darn it, there are choices involved! I had proposed http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ on this mailing list earlier and no-one seemed interested, but maybe now the time is right. Kindest regards, Tim ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
You are correct, I meant http://programmers.stackexchange.com/ And on a site like stackexchange I could actually edit my post instead of my mistake being permanent. :-) Kindest regards, Tim ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
A little more research shows that we could have a http://numpy.stackexchange.com. The requirements are just to have people involved. See http://area51.stackexchange.com/faq for more info. Kindest regards, Tim ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
If I remember correctly there used to be a stackexchange site at ask.scipy.org. It might be good to learn from that experience. I think handling with spam was a significant problem, but am not sure whether that is the reson why it got discontinued. Best srean On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Cera, Tim t...@cerazone.net wrote: A little more research shows that we could have a http://numpy.stackexchange.com. The requirements are just to have people involved. See http://area51.stackexchange.com/faq for more info. Kindest regards, Tim ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Olivier Delalleau sh...@keba.be wrote:
+1 for a numpy-users list without dev noise.
Moderately strong vote against splitting the mailing lists into devel and user.
As we know, this list can be unhappy and distracting, but I don't
think splitting the lists is the right approach to that problem.
Splitting the lists sends the wrong signal. I'd rather that we show
by example that the developers listen to all voices, and that the
users should expect to become developers. In other words that the
boundary between the user and developer is fluid and has no explicit
boundaries.
As data points, I make no distinction between scipy-devel and
scipy-user, nor cython-devel and cython-user. Policing the
distinction ('please post this on the user mailing list') is a boring
job and doesn't make anyone more cheerful.
I don't believe help questions are getting lost any more than devel
questions are, but I'm happy to be corrected if someone has some data.
Cheers,
Matthew
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
That is really funny. Looking through the posts, there wasn't any spam (could have been deleted), but it wasn't used as much as I would think. Have to attract people who answer questions. Early on the registration seemed to be a problem. Solace, the software behind ask.scipy.org looks pretty nice, EXCEPT that the last commit was in 2009. On the other have it could be that it has reached perfection. :-) Kindest regards, Tim ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On 6/28/12 2:46 PM, Cera, Tim wrote: That is really funny. Looking through the posts, there wasn't any spam (could have been deleted), but it wasn't used as much as I would think. Have to attract people who answer questions. Early on the registration seemed to be a problem. Solace, the software behind ask.scipy.org http://ask.scipy.org looks pretty nice, EXCEPT that the last commit was in 2009. On the other have it could be that it has reached perfection. :-) I'll just note that askbot.org provides a nice platform for ask.sagemath.org (last commit to askbot was yesterday :). I think it's as easy as 'pip install askbot' [1] Jason [1] http://askbot.org/doc/install.html ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
In case this changes your mind (or assuages fears) just wanted to
point out that many open source projects do this. It is not about
claiming that one is more important than the other, nor does it
reinforce the idea that developers and users live in separate silos,
but more of directing the mails to different folders. No policing is
required as well, just reply to the author and to the appropriate
list.
Right now reading numpy-discussion@scipy.org feels a lot like drinking
from a fire hydrant when a couple of threads become very active.
This is just anecdotal evidence, but I have had mails unanswered when
there is one or two threads that are dominating the list.
People are human and there will be situations where the top responders
will be overburdened and I think the split will mitigate the problem
somewhat. For whatever reasons, answering help requests are handled
largely by a small set of star responders, though I suspect the answer
is available more widely even among comparitively new users. I am
hoping (a) that with a separate ask for help such enlightened new
users can take up the slack (b) the information gets better organized
(c) we do not impose on users who are not so interested in devel
issues and vice versa. I take interest in devel related issues (apart
from the distracting and what at times seem petty flamewars) and like
reading the numpy source, but dont think every user have similar
tastes neither should they.
Best
Srean
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Olivier Delalleau sh...@keba.be wrote:
+1 for a numpy-users list without dev noise.
Moderately strong vote against splitting the mailing lists into devel and
user.
As we know, this list can be unhappy and distracting, but I don't
think splitting the lists is the right approach to that problem.
Splitting the lists sends the wrong signal. I'd rather that we show
by example that the developers listen to all voices, and that the
users should expect to become developers. In other words that the
boundary between the user and developer is fluid and has no explicit
boundaries.
As data points, I make no distinction between scipy-devel and
scipy-user, nor cython-devel and cython-user. Policing the
distinction ('please post this on the user mailing list') is a boring
job and doesn't make anyone more cheerful.
I don't believe help questions are getting lost any more than devel
questions are, but I'm happy to be corrected if someone has some data.
Cheers,
Matthew
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:42 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: In case this changes your mind (or assuages fears) just wanted to point out that many open source projects do this. It is not about claiming that one is more important than the other, nor does it reinforce the idea that developers and users live in separate silos, but more of directing the mails to different folders. No policing is required as well, just reply to the author and to the appropriate list. Yes, I know this split is common, but I don't think it works very well. I see that sympy, for example, has only one mailing list, and that works extremely well. I'd be interested to hear from the Cython and IPython guys as to whether they feel the user / devel split has helped or hurt. Ferando? Dag? And I continue to think it sends the wrong message. My impression is that, at the moment, we numpy-ers are trying to work out what kind of community we are. Are we a developer community, or are we some developers who are users of a library that we rely on, but do not contribute to? The split between a 'user' and a 'developer' carries an idea that is very important - exactly now. So, I (personally) think that exactly now we should not do this. Maybe later when we've really confronted the - ideas - that are the source of the current trouble. See you, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Am 28.06.2012 um 23:07 schrieb Matthew Brett: Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:42 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: In case this changes your mind (or assuages fears) just wanted to point out that many open source projects do this. It is not about claiming that one is more important than the other, nor does it reinforce the idea that developers and users live in separate silos, but more of directing the mails to different folders. No policing is required as well, just reply to the author and to the appropriate list. Yes, I know this split is common, but I don't think it works very well. I see that sympy, for example, has only one mailing list, and that works extremely well. I'd be interested to hear from the Cython and IPython guys as to whether they feel the user / devel split has helped or hurt. Ferando? Dag? And I continue to think it sends the wrong message. My impression is that, at the moment, we numpy-ers are trying to work out what kind of community we are. Are we a developer community, or are we some developers who are users of a library that we rely on, but do not contribute to? The split between a 'user' and a 'developer' carries an idea that is very important - exactly now. So, I (personally) think that exactly now we should not do this. Maybe later when we've really confronted the - ideas - that are the source of the current trouble. Let me share the point of view of a typical(?) lurker on this list. I have raised a few questions quite a while back that were very much in user land. I will probably (unfortunately) never actively contribute to the development of numpy but I like to know what's going on. As long as the bulk of postings are technical discussions I am quite happy to receive (and often delete) long threads that are totally above my head. However every once in a while there are these rather personal exchanges (I am loath to call them discussions) that basically clutter up everyones inbox. In principle, I would be happy to just delete them after a very cursory reading like almost all other posts, however, I have to admit they scare me, because this list was a place where even beginning users like myself could ask questions and get very helpful replies. The change in tone due to those discussions is discouraging to post simple questions (at least to me). So if this rather harsh tone of personal arguments is going to continue, I would very much favour a user and a developer list just because it reduces the barrier of asking stupid questions for new users. I would, however, very much prefer this list to go back to the previous style of being very technical with a supposting tone. Then I could still follow the discussions regarding the development of numpy and see some user questions mixed in... Cheers, Hanno ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Hanno Klemm kl...@phys.ethz.ch wrote: Am 28.06.2012 um 23:07 schrieb Matthew Brett: Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:42 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: In case this changes your mind (or assuages fears) just wanted to point out that many open source projects do this. It is not about claiming that one is more important than the other, nor does it reinforce the idea that developers and users live in separate silos, but more of directing the mails to different folders. No policing is required as well, just reply to the author and to the appropriate list. Yes, I know this split is common, but I don't think it works very well. I see that sympy, for example, has only one mailing list, and that works extremely well. I'd be interested to hear from the Cython and IPython guys as to whether they feel the user / devel split has helped or hurt. Ferando? Dag? And I continue to think it sends the wrong message. My impression is that, at the moment, we numpy-ers are trying to work out what kind of community we are. Are we a developer community, or are we some developers who are users of a library that we rely on, but do not contribute to? The split between a 'user' and a 'developer' carries an idea that is very important - exactly now. So, I (personally) think that exactly now we should not do this. Maybe later when we've really confronted the - ideas - that are the source of the current trouble. Let me share the point of view of a typical(?) lurker on this list. I have raised a few questions quite a while back that were very much in user land. I will probably (unfortunately) never actively contribute to the development of numpy but I like to know what's going on. As long as the bulk of postings are technical discussions I am quite happy to receive (and often delete) long threads that are totally above my head. However every once in a while there are these rather personal exchanges (I am loath to call them discussions) that basically clutter up everyones inbox. In principle, I would be happy to just delete them after a very cursory reading like almost all other posts, however, I have to admit they scare me, because this list was a place where even beginning users like myself could ask questions and get very helpful replies. The change in tone due to those discussions is discouraging to post simple questions (at least to me). So if this rather harsh tone of personal arguments is going to continue, I would very much favour a user and a developer list just because it reduces the barrier of asking stupid questions for new users. I would, however, very much prefer this list to go back to the previous style of being very technical with a supposting tone. Then I could still follow the discussions regarding the development of numpy and see some user questions mixed in... Yes, I think everyone wants the tone to be better. My very clear impression is that these arguments are signs of stress about real and significant issues, and that when we get down to those issues, and resolve them, then we will be in a better place than we were before. I guess I'm hoping that we can be patient enough to see the shape of the problem that keeps making this stuff happen, Cheers, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: I see that sympy, for example, has only one mailing list, and that works extremely well. I'd be interested to hear from the Cython and IPython guys as to whether they feel the user / devel split has helped or hurt. Ferando? Dag? There's evidence that projects can work successfully in either mode (single/dual lists), so I don't think this is a completely clear-cut question with a 'right' and a 'wrong' answer. What matters most is finding for each project and community what works best, and I think the main factor should be how truly disjoint are the topics and typical threads of the two lists. Before talking about IPython, we can consider Python itself, where there's a very clear division between the general and dev lists, and even the dev list has been recently split with a new 'ideas' list where more exploratory threads can take place, so that -dev can remain 100% focused on active, concrete development work on the main Python repo. And that strong separation of lists (which python-dev enforces strictly by calmly but firmly redirecting threads to other lists as soon as they seem off-topic for the narrow python-dev focus), seems to work pretty well for them. As far as IPython, I personally do prefer the separated lists, and I think it works quite well for us. IPython is a project often used by python beginners for simple learning of basic programming, and they just want to know how to tab-complete or how to get plots to run in non-blocking mode. Our -dev list is relatively high-traffic and with a weird mix of topics, given the rather eclectic nature of IPython: we have qt discussions, parallel computing, low-level networking/zeromq, javascript/web issues, protocol API threads, etc. All that can be overwhelming for novices (though obviously one hopes that novices would gradually learn from that and become interested in being developers). I think this is how I'd summarize it: - having two lists is friendlier to beginners, as it gives them an environment in which to ask questions that they may feel more comfortable in, because the level of the discussions tends to be not as complex as what happens in a -dev list. - but the cost it has is that it insulates users a bit more from the development ideas, perhaps lowering the likelihood that they will catch on to the development conversations and dig deeper into the project. My cartoon view of it would be: a. novice person | user list || dev list b. novice person || combined list where the | bars indicate 'barriers': in (a), a novice has a low barrier to become a good user, but a higher barrier to transfer into developer. With (b), there is no clear barrier to becoming a developer, but it's more intimidating for new users to join. I have heard (but I only have anecdotal evidence) of users saying that they feel more comfortable asking questions in user-only lists because of the level of the discussion, and that they can read all messages and learn something without having to filter threads that are way over their heads. Long answer, I know... But in short, I'm happy having two lists for IPython: I prefer to have the first transition (gaining active users) to be the easiest to make, because I think once users have become confident, the cost of digging deeper into development is actually pretty low. But I'm sure other projects can and have successfully made the opposite choice. Cheers, f ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Fernando Perez fperez@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: I see that sympy, for example, has only one mailing list, and that works extremely well. I'd be interested to hear from the Cython and IPython guys as to whether they feel the user / devel split has helped or hurt. Ferando? Dag? There's evidence that projects can work successfully in either mode (single/dual lists), so I don't think this is a completely clear-cut question with a 'right' and a 'wrong' answer. What matters most is finding for each project and community what works best, and I think the main factor should be how truly disjoint are the topics and typical threads of the two lists. Before talking about IPython, we can consider Python itself, where there's a very clear division between the general and dev lists, and even the dev list has been recently split with a new 'ideas' list where more exploratory threads can take place, so that -dev can remain 100% focused on active, concrete development work on the main Python repo. And that strong separation of lists (which python-dev enforces strictly by calmly but firmly redirecting threads to other lists as soon as they seem off-topic for the narrow python-dev focus), seems to work pretty well for them. As far as IPython, I personally do prefer the separated lists, and I think it works quite well for us. IPython is a project often used by python beginners for simple learning of basic programming, and they just want to know how to tab-complete or how to get plots to run in non-blocking mode. Our -dev list is relatively high-traffic and with a weird mix of topics, given the rather eclectic nature of IPython: we have qt discussions, parallel computing, low-level networking/zeromq, javascript/web issues, protocol API threads, etc. All that can be overwhelming for novices (though obviously one hopes that novices would gradually learn from that and become interested in being developers). I think this is how I'd summarize it: - having two lists is friendlier to beginners, as it gives them an environment in which to ask questions that they may feel more comfortable in, because the level of the discussions tends to be not as complex as what happens in a -dev list. - but the cost it has is that it insulates users a bit more from the development ideas, perhaps lowering the likelihood that they will catch on to the development conversations and dig deeper into the project. My cartoon view of it would be: a. novice person | user list || dev list b. novice person || combined list where the | bars indicate 'barriers': in (a), a novice has a low barrier to become a good user, but a higher barrier to transfer into developer. With (b), there is no clear barrier to becoming a developer, but it's more intimidating for new users to join. I have heard (but I only have anecdotal evidence) of users saying that they feel more comfortable asking questions in user-only lists because of the level of the discussion, and that they can read all messages and learn something without having to filter threads that are way over their heads. Long answer, I know... But in short, I'm happy having two lists for IPython: I prefer to have the first transition (gaining active users) to be the easiest to make, because I think once users have become confident, the cost of digging deeper into development is actually pretty low. But I'm sure other projects can and have successfully made the opposite choice. Fernando - you told me a week or so ago that you'd come across a blog post or similar advocating a single list - do you remember the reference? Thanks, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
And I continue to think it sends the wrong message. Maybe if you articulate your fears I will be able to appreciate your point of view more. My impression is that, at the moment, we numpy-ers are trying to work out what kind of community we are. Are we a developer community, or are we some developers who are users of a library that we rely on, but do not contribute to? I think it is fair to extrapolate that all of us would want the numpy community to grow. If that be so at some point not all of the users will be developers. Apart from ones own pet projects, all successful projects have more users than active developers. What I like about having two lists is that on one hand it does not prevent me or you from participating in both, on the other hand it allows those who dont want to delve too deeply in one aspect or the other, the option of a cleaner inbox, or the option of having separate inboxes. I for instance would like to be in both the lists, perhaps mostly as a lurker, but still would want to have two different folders just for better organization. To me this seems a win win. There is also a chance that more lurkers would speak up on the help list than here and I think that is a good thing. Best srean ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Could not have said this better even if I tried, so thank you for your long answer. -- srean On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Fernando Perez fperez@gmail.com wrote: Long answer, I know... ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: Fernando - you told me a week or so ago that you'd come across a blog post or similar advocating a single list - do you remember the reference? Found it after some digging: http://www.kitware.com/blog/home/post/263 and upon rereading it, it doesn't really advocate anything specific about mailing lists, just talking in general about a project considering all of its constituents as a single community, rather than two groups. And in that view, one can even argue that a single community can still benefit from multiple lists, much like the python developers have agreed to have python-dev and python-ideas as a way of triaging exploratory discussions form day-to-day work. But that's the post I had mentioned to you: I probably read it thinking about mailing lists as I went, which is why I think I misquoted it somewhat to you. Cheers, f ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: And I continue to think it sends the wrong message. Maybe if you articulate your fears I will be able to appreciate your point of view more. Ah - I'm afraid I don't know how to say what I mean more clearly :( I can repeat myself, more or less, to say that this split both encapsulates a distinction that I think we should not make, and distracts from the fundamental issues at stake behind the recent discussions. I suppose I'd add that it does some harm to seek technical solutions for fundamental societal problems. The technical solution may be more or less neutral in effect, but it takes the focus off the problem we should be dealing with. The joke about the drunk under a lamp post looking for his keys. See you, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: What I like about having two lists is that on one hand it does not prevent me or you from participating in both, on the other hand it allows those who dont want to delve too deeply in one aspect or the other, the option of a cleaner inbox, or the option of having separate inboxes. I for instance would like to be in both the lists, perhaps mostly as a lurker, but still would want to have two different folders just for better organization. I just want to mention that even as a project leader, I benefit from this: when I'm swamped, I simply ignore the user list. Not a nice thing to do, perhaps, but given the choice between moving the project forward and helping a new user, with often very limited time, I think it's the best solution possible. Of course I do help in the user list when I can, but I mostly encourage more experienced users to help new ones, so that our small dev team can spend its limited time moving the project forward. Cheers, f ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Fernando Perez fperez@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: Fernando - you told me a week or so ago that you'd come across a blog post or similar advocating a single list - do you remember the reference? Found it after some digging: http://www.kitware.com/blog/home/post/263 and upon rereading it, it doesn't really advocate anything specific about mailing lists, just talking in general about a project considering all of its constituents as a single community, rather than two groups. And in that view, one can even argue that a single community can still benefit from multiple lists, much like the python developers have agreed to have python-dev and python-ideas as a way of triaging exploratory discussions form day-to-day work. I'm not on the python mailing lists, but my impression is that python is in a different space from numpy. I mean, I have the impression (I may be wrong) that python already has a clear idea about how work gets done and how decisions are made. There's a mature PEP process and clear precedent for the process of working through difficult decisions. Numpy lacks this, and more fundamentally, does not appear to be sure to what extent it is a community project in the sense that I've understood it from other projects around us - like - say - IPython, sympy, and so on. So, it may not make sense to think in terms of a model that works for Python, or even, IPython. See you, Matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
I'm not on the python mailing lists, but my impression is that python is in a different space from numpy. I mean, I have the impression Indeed one could seek out philosphical differences between different projects. No two projects are the same but they can and often do have common issues. About the issues that Fernando mentioned I can say that they are real, they do apply and this I say from a from the experience of being on the numpy mailing list. I think that many silent numpy users will thank the creation of a low barrier, low noise (noise is context sensitive) forum where they can ask for help with what they feel are simple questions with easy answers. I still do not have a tangible grasp of what your fears are. It seems you are unhappy that this will split the community. It wont, its just two lists for the same community where mails have been sorted into different folders. It also seems the notion of developers and users is disagreeable to you and you are philosophically hesitant about accepting/recognizing that such a difference exists. I may be wrong, I do not intend to speak for you, I am only trying to understand your objections. First let me assure you they are labels on (temporary) roles not on a person (if that is what is making you uncomfortable). Different people occupy different states for different amounts of time. A question about how to run length decode an array of integers is very different from a question on which files to touch to add reduceat( ) support to the numexpression engine and how. It would be strange to take the position that there is no difference between the nature of these questions. Or to take the position that the person who is interest in the former is also keen to learn about the former (note: some would be, example: yours sincerely. I know the former ot the latter ) or at the least keen on receiving mails on extended discussion on the topic of lesser interest. It seems to me, that sorting these mails into different bins only improves the contextual signal to noise ratio, which the recipient can use as he/she feels fit. The only issue is if there will be enough volume for each of these bins. My perception is yes but this can certainly be revisited. In anycase it does not prevent nor hinder any activity, but allows flexible organization of content should one want it. So, it may not make sense to think in terms of a model that works for Python, or even, IPython. I do not want to read too much into this, but this I do find kind of odd and confusing: to proactively solicit input from other related projects but then say that do do not apply once the views expressed werent in total agreement. This thread is coming close to veer into the non-technical/non-productive/argumentative zone. The type that I am fearful off, so I will stop here. But I would encourage you to churn these views in your mind, impersonally, to see if the idea of different lists have any merit and to seek out what are the tangible harm that can come out of it. I think this request has come before (hasten to add not initiated by me) and the response had been largely been in favor, but nothing has happened. So I would welcome information on: if indeed two lists are to be made, who gets to create those lists Best, srean ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Fernando Perez fperez@gmail.comwrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: What I like about having two lists is that on one hand it does not prevent me or you from participating in both, on the other hand it allows those who dont want to delve too deeply in one aspect or the other, the option of a cleaner inbox, or the option of having separate inboxes. I for instance would like to be in both the lists, perhaps mostly as a lurker, but still would want to have two different folders just for better organization. I just want to mention that even as a project leader, I benefit from this: when I'm swamped, I simply ignore the user list. Not a nice thing to do, perhaps, but given the choice between moving the project forward and helping a new user, with often very limited time, I think it's the best solution possible. Of course I do help in the user list when I can, but I mostly encourage more experienced users to help new ones, so that our small dev team can spend its limited time moving the project forward. I'm okay with having two lists as it does filtering for me, but this seems like a sub-optimal solution. Observation: Some people would like to apply labels to incoming messages. Reality: Email was not really designed for that. We can hack it by using two different email addresses, but why not just keep this list as is and make a concentrated effort to promote the use of 2.0 technologies, like stackoverflow/askbot/etc? There, people can put as many tags as desired on questions: matrix, C-API, iteration, etc. Potentially, these tags would streamline everyone's workflow. The stackoverflow setup also makes it easier for users to search for solutions to common questions, and know that the top answer is still an accurate answer. [No one likes finding old invalid solutions.] The reputation system and up/down votes also help new users figure out which responses to trust. As others have explained, it does seem that there are distinct types of discussions that take place on this list. 1) There are community discussiuons/debates. Examples are the NA discussion, the bug tracker, release schedule, ABI/API changes, matrix rank tolerance too low, lazy evaluation, etc. These are clearly mailing-list topics. If you look at all the messages for the last two(!) months, it seems like this type of message has been the dominate type. 2) There are also standard questions. Recent examples are memory allocation at assignment, dot() function question, not expected output of fill_diagonal, silly isscalar question. These messages seem much more suited to the stackoverflow environment. In fact, I'd be happy if we redirected such questions to stackoverflow. This has the added benefit that responses to such questions will stay on topic. Note that if a stackoverflow question seeds a discussion, then someone can start a new thread on the mailing list which cite the stackoverflow question. tl;dr Keep this list the same, and push user questions to stackoverflow instead of pushing them to a user list. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
I like this solution and I think ask.scipy.org can be revived to take over that role, but this will need some policing to send standard questions there and also some hangout time at ask.scipy.org. I love the stackoverflow model but it requires more active participation of those who want to answer questions as compared to mailing lists. This because questions not only do not come to you by default but they also get knocked off the top page as more questions come in. Something to watch out for though I believe it wont be as bad as the main SO site. Meta^2 I have been top posting with abandon here. Not sure what is preferred here, top or bottom. Best srean On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 8:52 PM, T J tjhn...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Fernando Perez fperez@gmail.com wrote: I'm okay with having two lists as it does filtering for me, but this seems like a sub-optimal solution. Observation: Some people would like to apply labels to incoming messages. Reality: Email was not really designed for that. We can hack it by using two different email addresses, but why not just keep this list as is and make a concentrated effort to promote the use of 2.0 technologies, like stackoverflow/askbot/etc? There, people can put as many tags as desired on questions: matrix, C-API, iteration, etc. Potentially, these tags would streamline everyone's workflow. The stackoverflow setup also makes it easier for users to search for solutions to common questions, and know that the top answer is still an accurate answer. [No one likes finding old invalid solutions.] The reputation system and up/down votes also help new users figure out which responses to trust. As others have explained, it does seem that there are distinct types of discussions that take place on this list. 1) There are community discussiuons/debates. Examples are the NA discussion, the bug tracker, release schedule, ABI/API changes, matrix rank tolerance too low, lazy evaluation, etc. These are clearly mailing-list topics. If you look at all the messages for the last two(!) months, it seems like this type of message has been the dominate type. 2) There are also standard questions. Recent examples are memory allocation at assignment, dot() function question, not expected output of fill_diagonal, silly isscalar question. These messages seem much more suited to the stackoverflow environment. In fact, I'd be happy if we redirected such questions to stackoverflow. This has the added benefit that responses to such questions will stay on topic. Note that if a stackoverflow question seeds a discussion, then someone can start a new thread on the mailing list which cite the stackoverflow question. tl;dr Keep this list the same, and push user questions to stackoverflow instead of pushing them to a user list. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Meta: help, devel and stackoverflow
Hi, On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 7:50 PM, srean srean.l...@gmail.com wrote: I like this solution and I think ask.scipy.org can be revived to take over that role, but this will need some policing to send standard questions there and also some hangout time at ask.scipy.org. Sounds like a good idea to me too. If someone points me at it when the time comes, I'm happy to do hangout duty too. I love the stackoverflow model but it requires more active participation of those who want to answer questions as compared to mailing lists. This because questions not only do not come to you by default but they also get knocked off the top page as more questions come in. Something to watch out for though I believe it wont be as bad as the main SO site. Meta^2 I have been top posting with abandon here. Not sure what is preferred here, top or bottom. Me I prefer posting under the relevant stuff, but I don't think you'll get any flak either way. Cheers, matthew ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
