Re: Notifications@ ?

[Austin Bennett]

+1

The reply-to functionality works out the box via GH notification emails to
individual accounts.  I like the thought of adding that as ASF, but need to
explore whether worth the hassle of piping through ASF Infra [and the
associated downsides that were raised like messy messages from things like
email signatures in replies].




On Tue, Jun 13, 2023, 9:12 PM Joshua Poore  wrote:

> Hey Austin,
>
> This is looking an awful like the other thread on dev:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/5374nqhndp46fmv0hzdjp9b6s6v833bj
>
> This all involves add additional email lists and then pipeline
> Github/Gitbox notifications through to different lists.
>
> My original proposal:
>
> 1)  to open a ‘maintenance’ list for flagon and pipe dependabot alerts
> there suppress from dev
> 2)  to open a ‘PR’ list for flagon and pipe PR notifications through
> there.
> 3) commits will stay on the ‘commits’ thread.
> 4) pipe GitHub discussions and Issue mods through to ‘dev’
>
> How about we push GitHub Discussions and Issues through a “Notifications”
> list (would be good to keep that to human traffic and not dependably
> traffic), as you propose in lieu of [4] above. I love your idea for a
> “reply to” functionality.
>
> If that works for you, I’ll request the additional threads and we can
> start experimenting with modifying our .asf.yaml files given the example
> below:
>
> [image: plc4x.png]
>
> plc4x/.asf.yaml at e14a3d7dc8bae8ead824f019d5e87767c4460adc · apache/plc4x
> 
> github.com
> 
>
> 
>
>
> Did I miss anything?
>
> Josh
>
> On Jun 11, 2023, at 9:54 PM, Austin Bennett  wrote:
>
> Hi Flagon Dev,
>
> How do we feel about using a notifications@ list, so that not everything
> is
> piped to dev@?  That is one option mentioned from @ctubb...@apache.org
>  ( below ).
>
> That seems vastly preferable for people involved in issue/PR discussions to
> not receive duplicate messages.
>
> Related: if Infra is amenable, I am also willing to explore extending the
> functionality to be able to reply from email [ sent to list ] to get it
> back to GH, that's a very nice feature of the messages coming from GH.
>
> Interested to hear your thoughts.  If there is
> consensus/sufficient-support, I'll be happy to update .asf.yaml, and deal
> with creating that list [ I'm not sure whether I can move forward via lazy
> consensus if not hearing from people ].
>
> Thanks,
> Austin
>
>
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Christopher 
> Date: Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 6:11 PM
> Subject: Re: How to NOT receive GH traffic on devlist, for things my GH
> user is apart of?
> To: Austin Bennett 
> Cc: , 
>
>
> You'd really have to try to convince your project to configure their
> .asf.yaml file to send their GH notifications to a secondary list
> (like notifications@) which you can simply unsubscribe from, so you
> don't get duplicates from both GH and via the mailing list. That way
> users can choose to opt-in to the notifications@ list in addition to
> the dev@ list, at their choice. Some projects do this, while others
> are much more resistant to the idea, and would prefer you just
> configure your mail client to filter things out manually.
>
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 6:40 PM Austin Bennett  wrote:
>
>
> Hi Infra Users,
>
> The Flagon project currently receives GH notifications to the dev list.
>
> I'd prefer to not receive emails for Issues/Comments I am already
> participating in [ as it otherwise feels like spam ], is there a way to
> customize this so it does not get sent to me?  I write here since in the
> bottom of email to flagon's dev list as forwarded from GH it suggested to
> contact us...@infra.apache.org
>
>
> A related feature request [ maybe better for a different email?]:
> * When GH sends me notifications directly, I can reply to the issue/PR.
>
> This does not work when the traffic goes through the dev list [ if I reply
> to the message to dev list, the response goes to dev list, not to GH ].  Is
> that additional customization that we already have?  If not, is that
> something worth looking to build/support?
>
>
> Including dev@flagon for visibility, so devs can also potentially
>
> opt-into what gets determined.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Austin
>
>
>

Re: gRPC / Protobuf?

[proton_mail_bridge]

I am in favor of supporting alternate data serialization formats and data 
protocols, with JSON/REST as the default. Specifically, my current use case is 
best served by protobuf and kafkajs.


> On Jun 11, 2023, at 3:24 PM, Austin Bennett  wrote:
> 
> Hi Flagon Devs,
> 
> Does anyone else have experience with protobuf/gRPC.  Support is increasing
> for web, so it will eventually make sense to use.  Is it too early now?
> Does this concern people to also support?  Concretely, I tend to rip
> JSON/REST out of most code I touch, for the performance benefits.  I don't
> see JSON going away in this project, but do see benefits to at least
> support an alternative.
> 
> Since this would be a significant effort, it probably warrants a design doc
> and ensuring there is some form of consensus/support for the idea.
> 
> Any thoughts?  Concerns?  Opposition?
> 
> Thanks,
> Austin
> 
> 
> Ex:  see
> * https://github.com/grpc/grpc-web
> * https://protobuf.dev/
> * https://grpc.io/docs/platforms/web/basics/
> * https://github.com/bufbuild/protobuf-es
> * etc

Re: Notifications@ ?

[Joshua Poore]

Hey Austin,

This is looking an awful like the other thread on dev:  
https://lists.apache.org/thread/5374nqhndp46fmv0hzdjp9b6s6v833bj

This all involves add additional email lists and then pipeline Github/Gitbox 
notifications through to different lists.

My original proposal:

1)  to open a ‘maintenance’ list for flagon and pipe dependabot alerts there 
suppress from dev
2)  to open a ‘PR’ list for flagon and pipe PR notifications through there. 
3) commits will stay on the ‘commits’ thread.
4) pipe GitHub discussions and Issue mods through to ‘dev’

How about we push GitHub Discussions and Issues through a “Notifications” list 
(would be good to keep that to human traffic and not dependably traffic), as 
you propose in lieu of [4] above. I love your idea for a “reply to” 
functionality. 

If that works for you, I’ll request the additional threads and we can start 
experimenting with modifying our .asf.yaml files given the example below:

https://github.com/apache/plc4x/blob/e14a3d7dc8bae8ead824f019d5e87767c4460adc/.asf.yaml#L61
plc4x/.asf.yaml at e14a3d7dc8bae8ead824f019d5e87767c4460adc · apache/plc4x
github.com


Did I miss anything?

Josh

> On Jun 11, 2023, at 9:54 PM, Austin Bennett  wrote:
> 
> Hi Flagon Dev,
> 
> How do we feel about using a notifications@ list, so that not everything is
> piped to dev@?  That is one option mentioned from @ctubb...@apache.org
>  ( below ).
> 
> That seems vastly preferable for people involved in issue/PR discussions to
> not receive duplicate messages.
> 
> Related: if Infra is amenable, I am also willing to explore extending the
> functionality to be able to reply from email [ sent to list ] to get it
> back to GH, that's a very nice feature of the messages coming from GH.
> 
> Interested to hear your thoughts.  If there is
> consensus/sufficient-support, I'll be happy to update .asf.yaml, and deal
> with creating that list [ I'm not sure whether I can move forward via lazy
> consensus if not hearing from people ].
> 
> Thanks,
> Austin
> 
> 
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Christopher 
> Date: Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 6:11 PM
> Subject: Re: How to NOT receive GH traffic on devlist, for things my GH
> user is apart of?
> To: Austin Bennett 
> Cc: , 
> 
> 
> You'd really have to try to convince your project to configure their
> .asf.yaml file to send their GH notifications to a secondary list
> (like notifications@) which you can simply unsubscribe from, so you
> don't get duplicates from both GH and via the mailing list. That way
> users can choose to opt-in to the notifications@ list in addition to
> the dev@ list, at their choice. Some projects do this, while others
> are much more resistant to the idea, and would prefer you just
> configure your mail client to filter things out manually.
> 
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 6:40 PM Austin Bennett  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Infra Users,
>> 
>> The Flagon project currently receives GH notifications to the dev list.
> I'd prefer to not receive emails for Issues/Comments I am already
> participating in [ as it otherwise feels like spam ], is there a way to
> customize this so it does not get sent to me?  I write here since in the
> bottom of email to flagon's dev list as forwarded from GH it suggested to
> contact us...@infra.apache.org
>> 
>> A related feature request [ maybe better for a different email?]:
>> * When GH sends me notifications directly, I can reply to the issue/PR.
> This does not work when the traffic goes through the dev list [ if I reply
> to the message to dev list, the response goes to dev list, not to GH ].  Is
> that additional customization that we already have?  If not, is that
> something worth looking to build/support?
>> 
>> Including dev@flagon for visibility, so devs can also potentially
> opt-into what gets determined.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Austin