Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

Greg, I absolutely understand the motivation, every two years amount of programmers doubles. That is a crazy amount of newcomers. But these new people are not idiots and some technical level is required even for soft roles in our community. And we can make lists approachable very much like forums.

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

I also think it's important to note that just because things like mailman have existed for years and will continue to exist for years does not mean they're always the best tool for the job. As open source developers it's also important to be _open_ to change, and always to evaluate what the best

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

One more thought occurred to me while I was out on the nursery pickup, so I'll drop here before I bow out for the weekend. Lukas, I think part of our disagreement is our different goals. As I highlighted in the last mail, users behave differently to devs. These days I consider myself more user

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

Putting what I think is the more important part first ... On 03/11/17 13:30, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > What we are running is a mailing list here. We are running a mailing list *today*, and you're right, I want to change that. This may well be where we simply have to stop and let others join in

Re: [foreman-dev] Moving katello puppet modules to the foreman github namespace

All repositories have been transfered to theforeman Github organization. A new team has been created named 'Katello Installer' that contains all puppet modules and users from the same team in the Katello github organization. On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden <

[foreman-dev] Rails log is now printed for failed tests

Hey, just to want to increase visiblity of this patch: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman/pull/4739 In short, when you have a test failure, there should be a relevant Rails log printed on standard output. You can opt-out this via ENV variable if you don't like this, but I find this very

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

> So if I understand, you're OK with a web interface for creating / > managing a conversation that you don't want in your inbox in Hyperkitty, > but not happy with exactly the same workflow in Discourse? I find that > hard to resolve, can you clarify? All I want is standard mailman-like list

Re: [foreman-dev] Building a Rails 5.1 SCL

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Daniel Lobato Garcia wrote: > I agree with all of that, definitely something to do in a different > repository. > > Just one question, my understanding is that you prefer to do this (SCL) > because we are uncertain of the time/effort required

Re: [foreman-dev] Building a Rails 5.1 SCL

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden < ew...@kohlvanwijngaarden.nl> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 02:00:29PM -0400, Eric D Helms wrote: > >> In a previous thread [1], we discussed building an SCL vs. vendorizing >> gems >> and the general consensus was to build an SCL.

Re: [foreman-dev] Moving katello puppet modules to the foreman github namespace

Not sure if I understand what you mean. Are you saying to create a katello installer team in theforeman org to match it with the katello org one? That was similar to what I was thinking. It's the easiest in the short term and we can easily iterate from there. On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

Thanks Lukas - I wanted a healthy debate, and now I've got one :) This is indeed constructive - you've forced me to go back and examine my starting post more than a few times while writing this. That's a very good thing - we need to be sure of our goal here. There's a lot of good points here,

Re: Re: [foreman-dev] Building a Rails 5.1 SCL

On 11/02, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote: > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 11:24:26AM +0100, Daniel Lobato Garcia wrote: > > Just one question, my understanding is that you prefer to do this (SCL) > > because we are uncertain of the time/effort required for vendoring the > > gems/npm > > packages.

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

Quick update... A few people have been posting to the users/dev categories on Discourse, so let me quickly clarify - there is no sync Discourse -> List. Anything you post there will not make back to the lists. To help prevent that, for now I've locked those 3 categories. Admins can still post,

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

I was planning not to reply, but I can't sorry. >>> I don't like Discourse at all. <<< I was hoping to get rid of Google Groups in favour of - wait for it - GNU Mailman! Yeah, you might think this would be step backwards, but let me explain. GNU Mailman is the core of open source. It's the

Re: AW: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

On 02/11/17 17:46, Matthias Dellweg wrote: > Hi Greg, > so you tested the happy flow. But as a scientist i must ask you, did you check > the opposite, too? Does someone not being the author nor a member of the > mentioned > group not receive the notification? > cheers As it happens, I can answer

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

On 03/11/17 10:32, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > Greg, I have not interest in moving to any kind of web UI. I want to > send another millions of emails, including those "+1". I think we all > agree that any kind of migration must not disrupt way we work today - > a plain mailing-list we all know and use

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

Greg, I have not interest in moving to any kind of web UI. I want to send another millions of emails, including those "+1". I think we all agree that any kind of migration must not disrupt way we work today - a plain mailing-list we all know and use for decades. Thanks for decreasing it. I still

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

On 02/11/17 18:35, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > Tried to reply with just few words and I am getting: > > We’re sorry, but your email message to > [“theforeman.discourse+680bec16c469f36694d1ecef341e8...@gmail.com”] > (titled Re: [TheForeman] [Testing Area] October newsletter) didn’t > work. > Reason: >

Re: [foreman-dev] Foreman instrumenting analysis

> I lean towards the push model here. The main reason is > the simpler way to publish the instrumentation data from whatever > process we want to track. Also, my understanding is, that we don't care > only if the service is up or down (readiness and liveness) but also > about trends during the

Re: [foreman-dev] Propsing a move from Google Groups to Discourse

On Thu, 2 Nov 2017 at 19:35, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > Tried to reply with just few words and I am getting: > > We’re sorry, but your email message to > [“theforeman.discourse+680bec16c469f36694d1ecef341e8...@gmail.com”] > (titled Re: [TheForeman] [Testing Area] October