Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

> On Nov 13, 2016, at 6:03 PM, Gunnar Tapper wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > I guess you misunderstood what I am raising for discussion. I'm not arguing > against e-mail lists. I prefer them or we'd not have this discussion, right? > As a matter of fact, my projects at my

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi Jeff, I guess you misunderstood what I am raising for discussion. I'm not arguing against e-mail lists. I prefer them or we'd not have this discussion, right? As a matter of fact, my projects at my previous employer adopted an "everything happens on e-mail" to deal with timezone differences

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi Niclas, The thing about archiving is a great point and I agree with you that it is important to have archives that survive technologies disruptions, and mailing lists are unparalleled there. The main thing I see here is that we would want to be inclusive and bring discussions back to archives,

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

Le 13/11/16 à 22:57, Reynold Xin a écrit : > "a better global way to A) communicate across a medium that everyone uses > daily B) archive to search and come back to" > > How would we even validate or decide that? For discussions like this it is > very easy to fall into confirmation bias. > > I

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Reynold, I can recall the "newer technologies" argument since the inception[1] of ASF, and not a single one of these "newer technologies" has stood the test of time, and it is likely that the current "newer technologies" will eventually fall out of favor too, because of newer "newer technologies".

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

> On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:57 PM, Reynold Xin wrote: > > "a better global way to A) communicate across a medium that everyone uses > daily B) archive to search and come back to" > > How would we even validate or decide that? For discussions like this it is > very easy to fall

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

"a better global way to A) communicate across a medium that everyone uses daily B) archive to search and come back to" How would we even validate or decide that? For discussions like this it is very easy to fall into confirmation bias. I use mailing lists all the time since it is the Apache Way,

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

> On Nov 13, 2016, at 11:33 AM, Gunnar Tapper wrote: > As mentioned, the Apache Way is that "everything happens on the mailing > lists." As a matter of fact, key parts of being an incubator is to learn how > to operate per the Apache Way and to build communities. We

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi Luke, I'm sorry you feel that it was inappropriate to start a discussion about expanded community building in reaction the the RocketMQ proposal, especially since my intent was to help the proposed incubator based on what I've seen with the Trafodion project, which has a strong Chinese

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

ISCUSS] China Contribution. Hi, Copy/paste into a Translator, which detected the language automatically: In practice, the question of the language to use from a list of diffusion is specious. English it the lingua franca of the 21st century. Du kan göra precis samma sak med ett minoritetsspråk som s

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi Gunnar, > Given your statistics, I think there is: > "everything happens on the mailing lists" just isn't the case when there's > a 20K contributor community on WeChat. That's awesome news! But, it's > invisible to the rest of us. I think maybe I'm not bring message so clearly, let me

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

Yeah, we could remove the barrier by using the technology, instead of build another barrier for the communication. Most Chinese user barely use email for customer service, they just prefer to interaction directly with the people. But email could be more effective way, if we want to exchange

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I cannot agree more with that. It's not easy for the average user to understand the "mailing list rule", all they care is to get the answer as soon as possible. If they can get the answer from localize channel, they won't dig the mailing list. So It could be a good way if the committer or

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

Educate, trust and verify. IMO, there shouldn't be a rule that you can't write in non-English on dev@ or user@. You just have to understand the impact of doing so. Sometimes it will make sense to do so, other times, not. You have to know who in your community knows what languages. In Seattle,

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I think we should separate language barriers for dev@ (a channel for all its developers to agree on what the project is doing) and users@, which could be much more diverse, but follow more of a Questions and Answer format. It's clear that in the Apache Way, the dev@ list should use a language

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

On 11 Nov 2016 6:18 am, "Luke Han" wrote: > It's really not easy for Chinese people, they have to find out a way to > access > gmail or others since there's GFW, they are not native English speakers, > they have limited experiences for open source especially the Apache Way. >

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

Hi Woonsan, Yes, for the user@ list. At least up to a point where inline translation is working well and common. :) Thanks, Gunnar On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Gunnar Tapper > wrote: > >

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Gunnar Tapper wrote: > Hi, > > Copy/paste into a Translator, which detected the language automatically: In > practice, the question of the language to use from a list of diffusion is > specious. English it the lingua franca of the 21st

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

Hi, Copy/paste into a Translator, which detected the language automatically: In practice, the question of the language to use from a list of diffusion is specious. English it the lingua franca of the 21st century. Du kan göra precis samma sak med ett minoritetsspråk som svenska. Språk är inte

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

En pratique, la question de la langue à utiliser sur une liste de diffusion est spécieuse. L'anglais est la Lingua Franca du 21ème siècle. And if you haven't understood what I wrote in my native language, which is understood by around 500 million people around the globe, I guess you get my

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

What about an Apache Language Exchange TLP that would help people bridge language barriers, all from an Apache POV. There could be language resources, links to places, books, and whatnots that folks have found helpful to learn a language. Perhaps even a weekly chat channel for people to congregate

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi, I don't have any solutions, hence the discussion. If people show up on the mailing lists, you see them and can do whatever makes sense. That's not the issue. Like Ted, I believe the friendly approach is the way to go. We're using China as an example due to scale but I've seen

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I actually take a different tack on that. I answer questions everywhere and provide a pointer for other fora for followups. It gives a friendlier feeling, improves searchability and still encourages the mailing lists. My experience is that simply not answering and pushing the OP to the lists has

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I’m not sure that changes anything… that has been the nature of this since the beginning. For Apache… most happens on the mailing lists for very obvious reasons. Doing things outside tand not bringing them to the lists is frowned upon because it leaves the rest of the community in the dark.

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Regardless of the language being used, keeping discussions on-list can be hard work. In practice it requires the core members of the community to doggedly refuse to answer questions that are not asked in the correct forum. I can see how that doggedness might be perceived as rudeness. Total

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

A few things... 1. There's a huge thriving Apache community in China that operates outside of "everything happens on mailing lists." 2. As a committer in an incubator, I want to have insight into those communities. 3. I need to figure out if there's anything that can be done to encourage this

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

and you got your answer…. what changes? Jeff > On Nov 11, 2016, at 10:44 AM, Gunnar Tapper wrote: > > Hang on a second. This was not a discussion about RocketMQ. I asked a > question on the incubators list from a larger-picture perspective using > Trafodion and

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hang on a second. This was not a discussion about RocketMQ. I asked a question on the incubators list from a larger-picture perspective using Trafodion and RocketMQ as examples. As noted, neither Raynold nor I are part of the RocketMQ incubator so let's not ding that project for opinions expressed

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi Luke: This question was originally asked on the incubator list. The members list was added somewhere on the line. Part of the incubator challenge is to show community growth. In the past, a good metric seems to have been to check interaction on the mailing lists; for example, on the user

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

In a similar vein, all aviation radio communication must be conducted in English. There is even more of an overriding need there due to safety, but it is driven by similar realities. In addition to historical origins, the bulk of original and continued core participants being English only or

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

> As mentioned, the Chinese users have chosen to find an alternate means > to communicate that was invisible to the project until I heard about it. So, I > choose to accept reality and provided a link to the discussion group so that > others that wanted to discuss in Chinese knew where to go.

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I mostly listen on this list, but being international I simply cannot let this go un responded. I never said English will bring in more users than China. I *did* say that if you want more international/cross-border users, you will need to use a more international language. Outside of China I

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

> On Nov 11, 2016, at 12:42 AM, Reynold Xin wrote: > I'd avoid using the argument that English will bring more users, as it is not > defensible and risk being interpreted as western arrogance. Afterall, three > out of the six largest Internet companies (by market cap) are

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

long as they become important - like affecting the software development as opposed to just being coffee machine type discussions. -Bertrand - -- View this message in context: http://apache-incubator-general.996316.n3.nabbl

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

Just my 2 cents... I do not know for English - Chinese translations. But as a French native speaker who also speak a little bit of Japanese, my experience with Google translate is that it can be helpful between English and French (probably because those languages are relatively close), but is

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Emilian Bold wrote: > I believe the working language[1] of ASF projects is English... That's correct, so far, it's a far more concise way of expressing what I was trying to say ;-) The ASF is not currently able to provide oversight on projects

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

(note mixed private/public lists) Julian Hyde wrote on 11/11/16 8:31 AM: > I like the way that Reynold is coming at this. > > I am aware of the rule mandating English for discussions. But in the > interests of having no more rules than are strictly necessary, is it > not sufficient to tell PMCs

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I believe the working language[1] of ASF projects is English. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_language În Vin, 11 nov. 2016 la 11:13 Bertrand Delacretaz a scris: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:37 AM, Niclas Hedhman > wrote: > > ...there have

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:37 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > ...there have been language specific mailing lists in the past, but they tend > to be short-lived... I think an important distinction is between a project's dev list, which is where project decisions must be made. That

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Reynold Xin wrote: > Adding members@... Please don't cross-post, especially not between private and public list. general@incubator is a a fine place to have this discussions. -Bertrand

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 12:00 -0700, Gunnar Tapper wrote: > Hi, > > Using the RocketMQ proposal to start a larger discussion. > > Apache Trafodion is another project that has a lot of contribution from > China. > > One of the struggles I've seen is that the contributors aren't that active > on

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I like the way that Reynold is coming at this. I am aware of the rule mandating English for discussions. But in the interests of having no more rules than are strictly necessary, is it not sufficient to tell PMCs (and PPMCs): "Do whatever you believe will engage the largest possible

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Background: I have no tie to RocketMQ. I didn't even know about it until today and I don't know any of the people associated with the project. I am Chinese but living in the US. I'm purely playing devil's advocate about a meta-point here and don't know if it applies to RocketMQ or not. I

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

There is an explicit demand for English on generic mailing lists. However, there have been language specific mailing lists in the past, but they tend to be short-lived. I think that for those who don't communicate in English, it will be incredibly hard to be a useful contributor, heck even a

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi, Perhaps it would be a good idea to separate user lists from other lists? I was specifically referring to users wanting to ask questions and to get help. The support side if you will. As mentioned, the Chinese users have chosen to find an alternate means to communicate that was invisible to

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I would think that English is generally used because its the most international language, not because its the most used in the world. Thus it helps cross borders for communication. At the end of the day, I think you need to look at your community and ask if you want it to cross borders or

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

In Trafodion, I and others have simply used Google Translate (doesn't have to be that tool, just what was handy) for Chinese-to-English. It wasn't a big deal on the English side. But, the dialog stopped there so I don't know whether it was because the translation back doesn't work or something

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

I believe I saw something the other day where someone was talking about diverse languages on mailing lists. personally I think it's okay but obviously it decreases the chance of participation of others. of course the old saying "if it wasn't discussed on the list it never happened" didn't mention

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Adding members@ On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:40 PM, Reynold Xin wrote: > To play devil's advocate: is it OK for Apache projects that consist > primarily of Chinese developers to communicate in Chinese? Or put it > differently -- is it a requirement that all communications must be

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

To play devil's advocate: is it OK for Apache projects that consist primarily of Chinese developers to communicate in Chinese? Or put it differently -- is it a requirement that all communications must be in English? I can see an inclusiveness argument for having to use English, as English is one

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi Gunnar, I don't think your point is right, one community's problem (maybe not real, but just refer to what you mentioned) could NOT represent all contributions from China, or any other territories from all of the world. This will misleading people to ignore contributions from Chinese and

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi,Gunnar Tapper, Willem Jiang: It's a good idea that we can address the questions or issues through email list.Thanks for your advice. :) I am chinese hah~ Through the active participation of the community(Google Group, Apache Jira, Github Issue, even Gitter )these years, I also found that if

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi, As we can see more and more Chinese developer wants to contribute to Apache Software Foundation, but they still need to overcome the language barrier even some technical barriers to really join the community. I'm prefer to use email instead of IM or forums because all the discussion can be

[DISCUSS] China Contribution. (was: RocketMQ Incubation Proposal)

Hi, Using the RocketMQ proposal to start a larger discussion. Apache Trafodion is another project that has a lot of contribution from China. One of the struggles I've seen is that the contributors aren't that active on email. Rather, they prefer to use a forum on QQ communicating in Chinese.