Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Thierry Carrez]

Dean Troyer wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Thierry Carrez  > wrote:
> 
> One area where we could work to remove noise would be to move new core
> reviewers nomination/suggestion threads out of the ML. They are mostly
> useless IMHO (only +1s), and PTLs are empowered to make the call anyway.
> 
> That's one area where the PTL could move to "ask for forgiveness" model.
> If we really want a feedback mechanism, we could look for a way to move
> that to Gerrit or some other lightweight voting tool.
> 
> 
> Team meetings would also be a good public place to publicly affirm those
> nominations.  Not everyone interested may be there but it's a logged
> public place to accumulate +1s.

That's a good idea. Now how to communicate that... Should we jump on the
next thread about core-reviewer nomination and derail it ? Should we
(gasp) start a new thread to discuss that precise idea ?

In all cases, we may need some "openstack-dev sanity police" that jumps
on inadequate threads to keep them at an acceptable level. I did it for
some time for support questions, Anita did some as well for review
beggars... Volunteers welcome :)

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Dean Troyer]

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Thierry Carrez 
wrote:

> One area where we could work to remove noise would be to move new core
> reviewers nomination/suggestion threads out of the ML. They are mostly
> useless IMHO (only +1s), and PTLs are empowered to make the call anyway.
>
> That's one area where the PTL could move to "ask for forgiveness" model.
> If we really want a feedback mechanism, we could look for a way to move
> that to Gerrit or some other lightweight voting tool.
>

Team meetings would also be a good public place to publicly affirm those
nominations.  Not everyone interested may be there but it's a logged public
place to accumulate +1s.

dt

-- 

Dean Troyer
dtro...@gmail.com
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Clint Byrum]

Excerpts from Russell Bryant's message of 2015-03-23 07:51:43 -0700:
> On 03/23/2015 10:47 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> This is one of the benefits/caveats of having a single dev mailing list. 
> >> There is lots of noise for everyone, but this particular noise is one of 
> >> those I think we should not get rid of.
> > 
> > One area where we could work to remove noise would be to move new core
> > reviewers nomination/suggestion threads out of the ML. They are mostly
> > useless IMHO (only +1s), and PTLs are empowered to make the call anyway.
> > 
> > That's one area where the PTL could move to "ask for forgiveness" model.
> > If we really want a feedback mechanism, we could look for a way to move
> > that to Gerrit or some other lightweight voting tool.
> 
> In my experience, there's usually some behind the scenes discussion in
> advance, anyway.  Nobody really wants to propose someone publicly that
> might get a -1.
> 

[with some hesitation for irony..] +1

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Russell Bryant]

On 03/23/2015 10:47 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
>> [...]
>> This is one of the benefits/caveats of having a single dev mailing list. 
>> There is lots of noise for everyone, but this particular noise is one of 
>> those I think we should not get rid of.
> 
> One area where we could work to remove noise would be to move new core
> reviewers nomination/suggestion threads out of the ML. They are mostly
> useless IMHO (only +1s), and PTLs are empowered to make the call anyway.
> 
> That's one area where the PTL could move to "ask for forgiveness" model.
> If we really want a feedback mechanism, we could look for a way to move
> that to Gerrit or some other lightweight voting tool.

In my experience, there's usually some behind the scenes discussion in
advance, anyway.  Nobody really wants to propose someone publicly that
might get a -1.

-- 
Russell Bryant

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Thierry Carrez]

Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
> [...]
> This is one of the benefits/caveats of having a single dev mailing list. 
> There is lots of noise for everyone, but this particular noise is one of 
> those I think we should not get rid of.

One area where we could work to remove noise would be to move new core
reviewers nomination/suggestion threads out of the ML. They are mostly
useless IMHO (only +1s), and PTLs are empowered to make the call anyway.

That's one area where the PTL could move to "ask for forgiveness" model.
If we really want a feedback mechanism, we could look for a way to move
that to Gerrit or some other lightweight voting tool.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Kuvaja, Erno]

> -Original Message-
> From: Doug Hellmann [mailto:d...@doughellmann.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 3:07 PM
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all
> the things?
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Clint Byrum wrote:
> > > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> > > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> > > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> > >
> > > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements
> > > being on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a
> > > weekly digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that
> > > could be filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> >
> > The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
> > know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with
> > some announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory
> > low-traffic and high-attention), and some announcements being posted
> > to openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the
> > line drawn ?
> >
> > The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
> > case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
> > python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
> > the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
> > announcements defeats that purpose.
> >
> > We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce
> > to a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
> > announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
> > granted openstack-announce access ?
> >
> > Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
> > project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally
> > in a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
> > We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
> > are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure
> > it's worth it.
> >
> > So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
> > I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating
> > two classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).
> 
> We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release
> announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release
> might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to make it
> easy to create uniform and informative release note emails containing the
> level of detail people wanted. So far those are only being used by Oslo, but
> we're moving the scripts to the release-tools repo to make them easy for all
> library maintainers to use.
> 
> These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the
> folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are we
> going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce list
> complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are enough
> developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the release
> messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet?
> 
> >
> > Posting on -dev with a subject prefix would only marginally improve
> > the situation (release announcements are already pretty easy to spot
> > and manually filter out), so I'm +0 on that.
> >
> > Weekly posts or ratelimiting would imho remove 99% of the interest of
> > release announcements, so I'm -1 on that solution.
> >
> > --
> > Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> >
> >

I do agree partially with Doug and Thierry here.

The various lib releases do belong to the dev list and should not be rate 
limited nor combined together. Lib release <-> something breaking is very much 
dev thing and faster we have attention on that the better. As Thierry mentioned 
the format is already easy to filter out if not wanted. It's great that the 
tools to do this will become more available to get single format for that.

This is one of the benefits/caveats of having a single dev mailing list. There 
is lots of noise for everyone, but this particular noise is one of those I 
think we should not get rid of.

- Erno

> __
> 
> &g

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Dolph Mathews]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Doug Hellmann 
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Clint Byrum wrote:
> > > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> > > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> > > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> > >
> > > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> > > on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> > > digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> > > filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> >
> > The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
> > know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some
> > announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic
> > and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to
> > openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line
> > drawn ?
> >
> > The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
> > case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
> > python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
> > the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
> > announcements defeats that purpose.
> >
> > We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to
> > a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
> > announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
> > granted openstack-announce access ?
> >
> > Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
> > project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in
> > a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
> > We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
> > are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's
> > worth it.
> >
> > So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
> > I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two
> > classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).
>
> We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release
> announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release
> might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to
> make it easy to create uniform and informative release note emails
> containing the level of detail people wanted. So far those are only
> being used by Oslo, but we're moving the scripts to the release-tools
> repo to make them easy for all library maintainers to use.
>

Can we just change the subject line produced by the tooling from:

  [openstack-dev] [all] oslo.versionedobjects 0.1.1 release

to something like:

  [openstack-dev] [release] oslo.versionedobjects 0.1.1

That way everyone can more reliably filter these announcements as they wish?

I fall into the camp of "I don't ever want to see these announcements...
until something is broken and I need a culprit."


>
> These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the
> folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are
> we going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce
> list complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are
> enough developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the
> release messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet?
>
> >
> > Posting on -dev with a subject prefix would only marginally improve the
> > situation (release announcements are already pretty easy to spot and
> > manually filter out), so I'm +0 on that.
> >
> > Weekly posts or ratelimiting would imho remove 99% of the interest of
> > release announcements, so I'm -1 on that solution.
> >
> > --
> > Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> >
> >
> __
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:
> > openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Jeremy Stanley]

On 2015-03-13 20:09:40 +0100 (+0100), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
[...]
> PS: I am not subscribed to announce list. Though I am ok to do so
> if we push announcements there.

You might want to consider subscribing regardless of the outcome of
this discussion. There is often helpful community information
announced there which doesn't necessarily get cross-posted to the
-dev ML.

> (Do we have a way to *discuss* releases there though?)

As Thierry mentioned, we would set Reply-To (hopefully also
Mail-Followup-To) on those so that discussion automatically happens
on the -dev ml and doesn't add further noise to -announce.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Ihar Hrachyshka]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 03/12/2015 09:22 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads
> to read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean
> extra work, even with a streamlined workflow of
> single-key-press-per-thread.
> 
> So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements
> being on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a
> weekly digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that
> could be filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.

So here is what I personally get from those announcements:

- - since I'm a stable maintainer, when a gate failure occurs, we
usually have a habit of checking whether there were any recent library
releases. So I go to the list and check recent announcements.
Sometimes it becomes obvious to understand what's the coolprit, since
they contain not only version numbers, but also brief changelogs.
Sometimes announcement transforms into a thread if something goes
wrong due to release. So it's a good place to discuss any gate issues.

- - since I'm an oslo liaison for neutron, I find it extremely helpful
to track which new features are coming into the libraries, or when it
comes to a new library, I consider the official announcement as a sign
that now we're ok with consuming its releases.

For the 2nd case, weekly digest would also work. For the 1st one, not
at all.

PS: I am not subscribed to announce list. Though I am ok to do so if
we push announcements there. (Do we have a way to *discuss* releases
there though?)

/Ihar
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVAzX0AAoJEC5aWaUY1u577MUIAMgoyvbzSuVfBbL5d/fbEiKv
2pIK3W/4w3WALYLMHd+ZBBkktSc3dmpyZun6+4QH5qrXG0QsbdqENXUQKxQBag5b
TgAOh2NqXsFt3PsZDVV3joxuPTJrcvOKd6ISPm5WiEWFGx39WDoRFlBK4kFgFEN4
2/TvT8fvPnits8anJknlWQfCfwrtrqBaCK7uPdzSz88NYT2bARArT7y2cLWYLjVd
5GWoz2NvrLuJfhRhQ6IMIbzHnhSR/xIg1XGN1fKJIuHyaQdA/Xsy/6tB+5/oarG9
TTEofQ2+B7HCNaFH3UqUo0RMFBjP9JP+Qs2+/YlIUer5sH/G73IlvPLA8Rc8Mk0=
=vXtG
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Doug Hellmann]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 01:22 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2015-03-13 08:06:43 -0700:
> > 
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > > Clint Byrum wrote:
> > > > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> > > > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> > > > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> > > > 
> > > > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> > > > on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> > > > digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> > > > filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> > > 
> > > The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
> > > know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some
> > > announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic
> > > and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to
> > > openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line
> > > drawn ?
> > > 
> > > The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
> > > case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
> > > python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
> > > the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
> > > announcements defeats that purpose.
> > > 
> > > We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to
> > > a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
> > > announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
> > > granted openstack-announce access ?
> > > 
> > > Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
> > > project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in
> > > a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
> > > We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
> > > are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's
> > > worth it.
> > > 
> > > So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
> > > I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two
> > > classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).
> > 
> > We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release
> > announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release
> > might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to
> > make it easy to create uniform and informative release note emails
> > containing the level of detail people wanted. So far those are only
> > being used by Oslo, but we're moving the scripts to the release-tools
> > repo to make them easy for all library maintainers to use.
> > 
> 
> This is really what I'm asking about. If people were less happy with not
> having them, then it makes sense to have them.
> 
> > These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the
> > folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are
> > we going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce
> > list complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are
> > enough developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the
> > release messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet?
> > 
> 
> I hope I don't come across as complaining. I archive them very rapidly
> without ever looking at the content currently. Sometimes they come up in
> my searches for topics and then having them in the single timeline is
> great, but I have an email reader that supports this without changing
> the list behavior. I am more wondering if people who aren't as optimized
> as I am have trouble keeping up with them. And having a few less things
> to archive manually would certainly be nicer for me, but is a secondary
> goal.
> 
> I haven't seen very much interest in changing things, mostly people in
> support of keeping them as-is. So I suspect people are not annoyed about
> this in particular, and we can close the book on this thread.

OK, I also don't want to give the impression that I don't want to change
things, but I want to make sure we still achieve the goals we had. If
there's a way to make the messages easier to process that doesn't "hide"
them from the audience that needs to see them, we can adjust our
processes.

Doug

> 
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subje

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Clint Byrum]

Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2015-03-13 08:06:43 -0700:
> 
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Clint Byrum wrote:
> > > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> > > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> > > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> > > 
> > > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> > > on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> > > digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> > > filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> > 
> > The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
> > know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some
> > announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic
> > and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to
> > openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line
> > drawn ?
> > 
> > The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
> > case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
> > python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
> > the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
> > announcements defeats that purpose.
> > 
> > We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to
> > a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
> > announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
> > granted openstack-announce access ?
> > 
> > Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
> > project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in
> > a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
> > We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
> > are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's
> > worth it.
> > 
> > So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
> > I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two
> > classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).
> 
> We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release
> announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release
> might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to
> make it easy to create uniform and informative release note emails
> containing the level of detail people wanted. So far those are only
> being used by Oslo, but we're moving the scripts to the release-tools
> repo to make them easy for all library maintainers to use.
> 

This is really what I'm asking about. If people were less happy with not
having them, then it makes sense to have them.

> These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the
> folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are
> we going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce
> list complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are
> enough developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the
> release messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet?
> 

I hope I don't come across as complaining. I archive them very rapidly
without ever looking at the content currently. Sometimes they come up in
my searches for topics and then having them in the single timeline is
great, but I have an email reader that supports this without changing
the list behavior. I am more wondering if people who aren't as optimized
as I am have trouble keeping up with them. And having a few less things
to archive manually would certainly be nicer for me, but is a secondary
goal.

I haven't seen very much interest in changing things, mostly people in
support of keeping them as-is. So I suspect people are not annoyed about
this in particular, and we can close the book on this thread.

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Doug Hellmann]

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Clint Byrum wrote:
> > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> > 
> > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> > on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> > digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> > filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> 
> The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
> know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some
> announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic
> and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to
> openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line
> drawn ?
> 
> The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
> case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
> python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
> the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
> announcements defeats that purpose.
> 
> We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to
> a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
> announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
> granted openstack-announce access ?
> 
> Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
> project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in
> a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
> We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
> are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's
> worth it.
> 
> So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
> I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two
> classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).

We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release
announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release
might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to
make it easy to create uniform and informative release note emails
containing the level of detail people wanted. So far those are only
being used by Oslo, but we're moving the scripts to the release-tools
repo to make them easy for all library maintainers to use.

These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the
folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are
we going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce
list complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are
enough developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the
release messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet?

> 
> Posting on -dev with a subject prefix would only marginally improve the
> situation (release announcements are already pretty easy to spot and
> manually filter out), so I'm +0 on that.
> 
> Weekly posts or ratelimiting would imho remove 99% of the interest of
> release announcements, so I'm -1 on that solution.
> 
> -- 
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> 
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Thierry Carrez]

Clint Byrum wrote:
> I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> 
> So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.

The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some
announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic
and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to
openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line drawn ?

The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
announcements defeats that purpose.

We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to
a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
granted openstack-announce access ?

Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in
a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's
worth it.

So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two
classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).

Posting on -dev with a subject prefix would only marginally improve the
situation (release announcements are already pretty easy to spot and
manually filter out), so I'm +0 on that.

Weekly posts or ratelimiting would imho remove 99% of the interest of
release announcements, so I'm -1 on that solution.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Robert Collins]

On 13 March 2015 at 12:22, Clint Byrum  wrote:
> Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2015-03-12 13:58:20 -0700:
>> On 2015-03-12 13:22:04 -0700 (-0700), Clint Byrum wrote:
>> [...]
>> > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements
>> > being on the discussion list.
>> [...]
>>
>> The main thing I get from them is that they're being recorded to a
>> (theoretically) immutable archive indexed by a lot of other systems.
>> Some day I'd love for them to include checksums of the release
>> artifacts and be OpenPGP-signed by a release delegate for whatever
>> project is releasing, and for those people to also try to get their
>> keys signed by one another and members of the community at large.
>>
>
> I had not considered the value of that, but it seems like a good thing.
>
>> Sure, we could divert them to a different list (openstack-announce
>> was suggested in another reply), but I suspect that most people
>> subscribed to -dev are also subscribed to -announce and so it
>> wouldn't effectively decrease their E-mail volume. On the other
>> hand, a lot more people should be subscribed to -announce so that's
>> probably a good idea anyway?
>
> openstack-announce would be the opposite of less impact on the signal
> to noise ratio for anyone who does want to see them. I prioritize
> openstack-announce since I would assume announcements would mostly be
> important things reserved for a low-traffic list.
>
> So I think a tag seems like a reasonable way to keep them on the list,
> but allow for automated de-prioritization of them by those who don't
> want to see them.
>
> Could we maybe have a [release] tag mandated for these?

Rather than adding process, how about we setup automation in zuul for
this. Then email tags etc don't require human thought, training etc.

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins 
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Clint Byrum]

Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2015-03-12 13:58:20 -0700:
> On 2015-03-12 13:22:04 -0700 (-0700), Clint Byrum wrote:
> [...]
> > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements
> > being on the discussion list.
> [...]
> 
> The main thing I get from them is that they're being recorded to a
> (theoretically) immutable archive indexed by a lot of other systems.
> Some day I'd love for them to include checksums of the release
> artifacts and be OpenPGP-signed by a release delegate for whatever
> project is releasing, and for those people to also try to get their
> keys signed by one another and members of the community at large.
> 

I had not considered the value of that, but it seems like a good thing.

> Sure, we could divert them to a different list (openstack-announce
> was suggested in another reply), but I suspect that most people
> subscribed to -dev are also subscribed to -announce and so it
> wouldn't effectively decrease their E-mail volume. On the other
> hand, a lot more people should be subscribed to -announce so that's
> probably a good idea anyway?

openstack-announce would be the opposite of less impact on the signal
to noise ratio for anyone who does want to see them. I prioritize
openstack-announce since I would assume announcements would mostly be
important things reserved for a low-traffic list.

So I think a tag seems like a reasonable way to keep them on the list,
but allow for automated de-prioritization of them by those who don't
want to see them.

Could we maybe have a [release] tag mandated for these?

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Flavio Percoco]

On 12/03/15 23:31 +0300, Boris Pavlovic wrote:

Clint, 

Personally I am quite interested in new releases of python clients and oslo
stuff, but I believe 
that oslo releases announcement should be merged to single email with rate
limit 1 email per week. 
It will be much simpler at least for me to track stuff. 


I think this would make more sense than not sending them. I guess
there's something we can workout to make it happen.

Flavio




Best regards,
Boris Pavlovic 

On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Clint Byrum  wrote:

   I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
   read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
   work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.

   So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
   on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
   digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
   filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.

   __
   OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
   Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
   http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev





__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


pgpmE5ZvqXlkY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Jeremy Stanley]

On 2015-03-12 13:22:04 -0700 (-0700), Clint Byrum wrote:
[...]
> So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements
> being on the discussion list.
[...]

The main thing I get from them is that they're being recorded to a
(theoretically) immutable archive indexed by a lot of other systems.
Some day I'd love for them to include checksums of the release
artifacts and be OpenPGP-signed by a release delegate for whatever
project is releasing, and for those people to also try to get their
keys signed by one another and members of the community at large.

Sure, we could divert them to a different list (openstack-announce
was suggested in another reply), but I suspect that most people
subscribed to -dev are also subscribed to -announce and so it
wouldn't effectively decrease their E-mail volume. On the other
hand, a lot more people should be subscribed to -announce so that's
probably a good idea anyway?
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Gregory Haynes]

Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2015-03-12 20:22:04 +:
> I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> 
> So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> 

++

Or maybe even just send them to the already existing openstack-anounce
list?

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Boris Pavlovic]

Clint,

Personally I am quite interested in new releases of python clients and oslo
stuff, but I believe
that oslo releases announcement should be merged to single email with rate
limit 1 email per week.
It will be much simpler at least for me to track stuff.


Best regards,
Boris Pavlovic

On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Clint Byrum  wrote:

> I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
>
> So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [all] Do we need release announcements for all the things?

[Clint Byrum]

I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.

So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev