Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance
Bastien writes: >>> Not just this: I’m concerned with setting up a user-to-user discussion >>> space that reify a split between users (on a forum) and developers (on >>> the mailing list). >> >> For what it’s worth, as a developer I’d be very interested in the ability of >> a >> forum to categorise feature requests/bug reports/workflow discussions, etc. > > But then the ML and the forum would compete with each other from a > maintainer's point a view: the ones using solely the ML would not get > the same information than the ones using the forum. I do not know the details about Discourse-email integration. If category changes are also emailed, Woof! might be able to work with those. In any case, we cannot really expect everything going on in Discourse to be reflected on Org ML. Org ML will always get less metadata and, as discussed, we do not even aim to sync all the Discourse posts with Org ML - just relevant. -- Ihor Radchenko, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at https://orgmode.org/. Support Org development at https://liberapay.com/org-mode, or support my work at https://liberapay.com/yantar92
Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance
Hi Timothy, Timothy writes: >> Not just this: I’m concerned with setting up a user-to-user discussion >> space that reify a split between users (on a forum) and developers (on >> the mailing list). > > For what it’s worth, as a developer I’d be very interested in the ability of a > forum to categorise feature requests/bug reports/workflow discussions, etc. But then the ML and the forum would compete with each other from a maintainer's point a view: the ones using solely the ML would not get the same information than the ones using the forum. >> If a community-driven Discourse instance for Org emerges, that will be >> a good thing: people could go there instead (or on top) of SO/reddit >> if they don’t want/like to interact on a mailing list. > > We could canvas reddit for example to see if the people currently on there > would > be interested in an Org discourse. Yes, but mentioning that this would not be "the" Org discourse (not forum.orgmode.org), just "a" Org forum maintained by X for the benefit of the whole Org community (which is not really a thing actually, just a mental shortcut for "every Org user out there"). It would be a good outcome to have such a forum: I'd be more comfy recommending users to ask questions there iff they don't want/like sharing questions on the ML than recommending them using reddit and the like. All best, -- Bastien
Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance (was: IM dev discussions?)
Tim Cross writes: > Given that Discourse is open source and free (in GNU sense being GPL > v2), perhaps a better approach would be to try and get the FSF to host a > Discourse server from GNU projects (not just org). This would be in > addition to the mail lists hosting currently provided. I think that it is premature to talk about this just yet. As I stated in the subject, I am more interested in ML-Discourse integration possibility. Preferably with an existing Discourse instance. We can indeed have a community Discourse (hosted by FSF or some other means). But it will not help with current fragmentation of the Org community. Not adding yet another place for discussion. > I think Discourse is an interesting take on things and I can see how it > could be beneficial to org mode, but we need to be realistic about the > costs and resources needed. We have to have a reasonable confidence > regrading long-term viability (i.e. our ability to administer and > resource the service). I think it would be a mistake to rely on a 3rd > party provider unless we have high confidence that 3rd party will be > able to resource and maintain a server over the long term. I envision Org ML being a central hub of the Org community with ability to access its portions from other platforms (like Discourse). Individual platforms may or may not include the whole message traffic from Org ML. The key point is making it easy to share Org core-related questions with Org ML without compromising accessibility ML provides. A number of people prefer using shiny new platforms these days. If those platforms can be transparently connected to Org ML, we do not need to worry about new trendy things dying out over a couple of years. Org ML will still remain and record the relevant discussions in public inbox. Yet, people who are cringy about using email will be able to communicate with the core Org community. -- Ihor Radchenko, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at https://orgmode.org/. Support Org development at https://liberapay.com/org-mode, or support my work at https://liberapay.com/yantar92
Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance
Hi Bastien, > Not just this: I’m concerned with setting up a user-to-user discussion > space that reify a split between users (on a forum) and developers (on > the mailing list). For what it’s worth, as a developer I’d be very interested in the ability of a forum to categorise feature requests/bug reports/workflow discussions, etc. > If a community-driven Discourse instance for Org emerges, that will be > a good thing: people could go there instead (or on top) of SO/reddit > if they don’t want/like to interact on a mailing list. We could canvas reddit for example to see if the people currently on there would be interested in an Org discourse. All the best, Timothy
Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance
Ihor Radchenko writes: > The main question we need to answer is who is going to maintain that > Discourse instance. AFAIU, Bastien is mainly concerned with the extra > maintenance burden. Not just this: I'm concerned with setting up a user-to-user discussion space that reify a split between users (on a forum) and developers (on the mailing list). If a community-driven Discourse instance for Org emerges, that will be a good thing: people could go there instead (or on top) of SO/reddit if they don't want/like to interact on a mailing list. If this instance is stable and useful enough and futur Org maintainers feel like this should be advertized as forum.orgmode.org, they will be able to do it of course. -- Bastien
Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance (was: IM dev discussions?)
"Bruce D'Arcus" writes: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 2:25 PM Tim Cross wrote: > >> Discourse is not free - either you have to pay or you have to self host. > > IIRC, it is for open source projects. > > Yes: > > https://blog.discourse.org/2018/11/free-hosting-for-open-source-v2/ > > Bruce Thanks Bruce. That option is not mentioned on their pricing page at all. Looking at it, it seems there are restrictions and it is at their discretion (you have to apply). There are also bandwidth limits, but I don't know what our 'normal' usage is and what it would be using the discourse UI. Basically, we only get 50k page views per month. Their definition is "Page views All requests for content such as a list of categories, topics, or posts, count as page views, whether by a human or a web crawler. Any request that reaches our servers and incurs significant work will be counted as a page view." If you assume 10 posts per day, that would allow only around 178 views per post. That feels a little low to me. However, this could be completely wrong a it isn't easy to tell exactly what data is transferred with each request. It isn't easy to know exactly which clicks on UI elements result in a new data request. The concern would be that if it did turn out to be a popular solution, we could end up needing to purchase the 'standard' plan and while we wold get that at a discounted price, it is an expense that would need to be met. (the standard plan would give us 100k page views per month).
Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance (was: IM dev discussions?)
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 2:25 PM Tim Cross wrote: > Discourse is not free - either you have to pay or you have to self host. IIRC, it is for open source projects. Yes: https://blog.discourse.org/2018/11/free-hosting-for-open-source-v2/ Bruce
Re: Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance (was: IM dev discussions?)
Ihor Radchenko writes: > Payas Relekar writes: > >> Perhaps we can check if it is indeed possible to bridge both Discourse >> and mailing list seamlessly (or close enough). There are some issues >> with extra chrome and clutter in discourse notifications, but these 2 >> links are what I found in 5 minutes of googling. A more thorough >> research might just yield what we desire. > > The main question we need to answer is who is going to maintain that > Discourse instance. AFAIU, Bastien is mainly concerned with the extra > maintenance burden. > > Can we simply reuse some of the existing discourse instances like Org > Roam? Will the existing maintainers be interested to take this task? > > If we have a volunteer to run Discourse and setup the email bridge, I > feel we can get something really useful. It is largely about maintenance, but what about hosting? Discourse is not free - either you have to pay or you have to self host. Where would we self host? Given that Discourse is open source and free (in GNU sense being GPL v2), perhaps a better approach would be to try and get the FSF to host a Discourse server from GNU projects (not just org). This would be in addition to the mail lists hosting currently provided. I think Discourse is an interesting take on things and I can see how it could be beneficial to org mode, but we need to be realistic about the costs and resources needed. We have to have a reasonable confidence regrading long-term viability (i.e. our ability to administer and resource the service). I think it would be a mistake to rely on a 3rd party provider unless we have high confidence that 3rd party will be able to resource and maintain a server over the long term.
Org ML integration with an existing Discourse instance (was: IM dev discussions?)
Payas Relekar writes: > Perhaps we can check if it is indeed possible to bridge both Discourse > and mailing list seamlessly (or close enough). There are some issues > with extra chrome and clutter in discourse notifications, but these 2 > links are what I found in 5 minutes of googling. A more thorough > research might just yield what we desire. The main question we need to answer is who is going to maintain that Discourse instance. AFAIU, Bastien is mainly concerned with the extra maintenance burden. Can we simply reuse some of the existing discourse instances like Org Roam? Will the existing maintainers be interested to take this task? If we have a volunteer to run Discourse and setup the email bridge, I feel we can get something really useful. -- Ihor Radchenko, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at https://orgmode.org/. Support Org development at https://liberapay.com/org-mode, or support my work at https://liberapay.com/yantar92
