Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-18 Thread Thierry Carrez
Morgan Fainberg wrote:
 TL;DR Don't split the community, work to improve the tools for those
 who are overwhelmed. (Email clients, enforcing use of subject tags,
 etc)

Thanks everyone for the insightful comments ! Like I said earlier, we
can keep it the way it is, but I just wanted to make sure the benefits
outweigh the drawbacks. In this precise case it appears that we can try
to minimize the drawbacks by using appropriate tools and techniques,
while it's hard to preserve the cross-pollination benefits if we split
the list.

It's also a bit unclear that just separating stackforge topics would
actually make that big of a difference. So my suggestion would be:

- continue having everything on the same list
- encourage the use of clear subject lines and topic prefixes
- fight off-topic threads (feel free to join the squad)
- replace redundant/recurrent information by appropriate reference info
(think meeting reminders vs. ical feed)
- exchange tips and tricks on how to deal with the mail pile efficiently

And yes, the irony of having created a 60+ message thread to discuss
reducing the amount of emails we all have to parse is not totally lost
on me :)

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-18 Thread Chmouel Boudjnah
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Monty Taylor mord...@inaugust.com wrote:

 Can I suggest that you don't try purely mechanical filtering into
 folders? Instead, for a while, try using a threaded client, and
 configure it to show threads unexpanded by default.



if we are into mail client tips, Emacs GNUS has an amazing way to deal with
that with the 'scoring' feature which allow you to get a better scoring in
the current mailbox according to the subject, from, conditionals and other
patterns. You end up with the most important stuff you want to read at the
top and with a different colour and the other stuff at the bottom.

More infos here:

http://www.emacs.uniyar.ac.ru/doc/em24h/emacs183.htm

Chmouel.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-18 Thread Brian Cline
Honestly, with that reasoning, this approach strikes me as a technical solution 
to a political problem, a band-aid on a sprained ankle, and so on and so forth 
in that pattern.

There was no shortage of talk about cross-project coordination challenges in HK 
and Portland, so it shouldn't be news to anyone -- but keeping all project 
lists consolidated into one doesn't seem like a good solution if we're already 
doing that today and still have just as much cross-project coordination 
problems. That coordination should be fostered separately through process by OS 
leadership, rather than mailing list structure.

For what it's worth, I much prefer Caitlin's and Stefano's approach, separate 
established project lists with a single list for incubator projects. The 
tagging here isn't always consistent (or there at all sometimes -- we've all 
made that mistake before), so things often slip by the filters. I have 14 rules 
set up to catch most of the core projects, and I'm still getting tons more 
general dev discussion than I can keep up with (something I really *want* to be 
able to do, as both a developer and implementor).

Brian


-Original Message-
From: Monty Taylor [mailto:mord...@inaugust.com] 
Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2013 1:48 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list



On 11/14/2013 07:54 PM, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
 On 11/14/2013 5:12 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Hi everyone,

 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.

 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects

 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted
 projects

 
 I would suggest that each *established* project (core or incubator) have
 its own mailing list, and that openstack-dev be reserved for
 topics of potential interest across multiple projects (which new
 projects would qualify as).

We've actually explicitly avoiding this model for quite some time on
purpose. The main reason being that one of the hardest challenges we
have is cross-project collaboration. Hacking just one one project? Not
so hard. Producing the output of 18 in a coordinated fashion? Hard.

Everyone does a great job so far of prefixing things.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-17 Thread Morgan Fainberg
A couple of quick points.
1) I think that splitting the list is the wrong approach.
2) Perhaps we need to look at adding a mechanism that enforces the use
of tags in the subject line (send a nice sorry, but you need to
indicate the topic(s) you are mailing about error back if it doesn't
exist, keep an active list of these via infra?).
3) It might also make sense to have all stackforge projects include
[stackforge] in the topic.  That will help make filtering easier.

Finally, I notice the difference in a threaded client from a flat
client.  I don't think I could subscribe to this list without a
threaded client.

TL;DR Don't split the community, work to improve the tools for those
who are overwhelmed. (Email clients, enforcing use of subject tags,
etc)

On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Nick Chase nch...@mirantis.com wrote:
 I am one of those horizontal people (working on docs and basically one of
 the people responsible at my organization for keeping a handle on what's
 going on) and I'm totally against a split.

 Of COURSE we need to maintain the integrated/incubated/proposed spectrum.
 Saying that we need to keep all traffic on one list isn't suggesting we do
 away with that. But it IS a spectrum, and we should maintain that. Splitting
 the list is definitely splitting the community and I agree that it's a
 poison pill.

 Integrating new projects into the community is just as important as
 integrating them into the codebase.  Without one the other won't happen
 nearly as effectively, and we do lose one of the strengths of the community
 as a whole.

 Part of this is psychology. Many of us are familiar with broken windows
 theory[1] in terms of code.  For those of you who aren't, the idea is based
 on an experiment where they left an expensive car in a crime-ridden
 neighborhood and nothing happened to it -- until they broke a window.  In
 coding it means you're less likely to kludge a patch to pristine code, but
 once you do you are more likely to do it again.

 Projects work hard to do things the OpenStack way because they feel from
 the start that they are already part of OpenStack, even if they aren't
 integrated.

 It also leads to another side effect, which I'll leave to you to decide
 whether it's good or bad.  We do have a culture of there can be only one.
 Once a project is proposed in a space, that's it (mostly).  We typically
 don't have multiple projects in that space.  That's bad because it reduces
 innovation through competition, but it's good because we get focused
 development from the finite number of developers we have available. As I
 said, YMMV.

 Look, Monty is right: a good threaded client solves a multitude of problems.
 Definitely try that for a week before you set your mind on a decision.

 TL; DR Splitting the list is splitting the community, and that will lead to
 a decline in overall quality.

 [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory


 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-16 Thread Monty Taylor


On 11/15/2013 05:06 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Wow, lots of different opinions! let's try to summarize:
 
 Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
 * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
 * Traffic would drop by about 25%
 * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack
 
 Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
 * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
 * More chaos creates more innovation
 
 Personally I was fine with having everyone in the same burgeoning city
 (to quote the lyrical Clint) until we recently crossed the bar of making
 that city painful for a lot of people. Especially the people who work on
 serving the needs of all OpenStack projects (think release management,
 doc, QA, infra) and who have to pay some level of attention to every thread.
 
 Yes, those people can filter out all stackforge discussions into a
 separate folder: identify all the corresponding prefixes and setting
 filters for them (and praying that they would all just use the right
 suffixes). But rather than forcing everyone to go through that setup,
 why not set up a list and make it more convenient for everyone to apply
 different (or similar !) reading rules to the two different groups.
 
 Because they ARE two different groups. One is OpenStack and must get
 the extra attention of all the people working on horizontal functions
 (that is what incubation is about, carefully controlling access to extra
 common resources). The other is not yet OpenStack, free-for-all. The
 latter group clearly benefits from being on the same list: they get
 extra attention from all those smart OpenStack people, and their
 marketing can benefit from the very blurry line between openstack and
 not-yet-openstack we maintain on the list.

I don't think this applies at the mailing list level. If someone wants
attention from the infra team, for instance, I certainly hope they don't
think they're going to get it by mentioning the need inside of a mailing
list thread and hoping we'll see it.

Mailing lists are for conversation and discussion. I see absolutely no
reason to segregate some of those conversations as real and others as
not. In fact, our original hard insistence that projects started off in
the corner until they magically one day became openstack is what got us
into the mess we've gone through originally with keystone (which needed
a complete from-scratch rewrite) and now with neutron. Both of those
came about before we had more inclusive ways of projects growing themselves.

tl;dr Separation has been tried before, and it simple does not work.

 In summary, I certainly see the benefits of a single list for stackforge
 developers (and why people working on a limited number of vertical
 projects don't really mind either way...). But I fear that we maintain
 those benefits at the expense of the sanity of the horizontal programs
 in openstack, and therefore lower the quality of OpenStack as a result.
 
 PS: I don't think we can reach consensus on that one -- we might need to
 push it to the TC to make a final call.
 

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-16 Thread Monty Taylor


On 11/15/2013 12:08 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Adrian Otto wrote:
 If OpenStack starts a culture of exclusion instead of inclusion, that would 
 start a dangerous trend that sets the wrong tone. It would quickly reach the 
 point where new projects like mine would simply not come here. We would go 
 somewhere else that does have a culture of inclusion. We would not employ 
 the values of open design and open collaboration, and we would be back to 
 the throw stuff over the wall approach to open source. That would be a 
 tragedy. Don't destroy the things about OpenStack's community that make it 
 awesome.
 
 It's definitely a trade-off between usability and community inclusion...
 Trust me, I understand the value of cross-pollination, which is why I
 wouldn't support a pure per-project split (as suggested elsewhere in
 this thread). I'm just trying to find the right balance.
 
 Because they ARE two different groups.

 That thinking is backwards. From a community perspective we are not two 
 different groups. Making us into two groups is a huge mistake.
 
 I was talking about groups of projects. We have an incubation process to
 decide when new projects are allowed to start tapping into OpenStack
 common resources, like use an openstack/* repo, get into the integrated
 gate, or tap into QA or release management dudes for guidance. I see
 openstack-dev ML space as one of those common resources. Letting anyone
 use it to talk about their new stackforge project has some cost, even if
 it's an externality to you.
 
 This is not about excluding anyone, it's about prioritizing our
 resources. If we followed your line of thought, we should just abandon
 the project incubation process because it's a way to prevent promising
 projects from accessing resources they need in order to develop their
 full potential.
 
 Anyway, I don't expect to convince you, since you're clearly the one
 benefiting the most from the current setup. I'm on the other end of the
 spectrum, trying my best to keep my sanity with the ever-growing number
 of things I need to keep an eye on :) And maybe the benefits of
 unlimited cross-pollination are worth more than the drawback of forcing
 everyone to process enormous email piles every day. (Filtering is an
 option I have with well-behaved projects like Solum, I just fear it
 would not work so well for less filterable threads.)

Can I suggest that you don't try purely mechanical filtering into
folders? Instead, for a while, try using a threaded client, and
configure it to show threads unexpanded by default. Then, when you're
going to read openstack-dev, you can scan the subject lines with your
eyes, which are AMAZINGLY good at pattern recognition and
contextualization. It's pretty easy to skip over the non-OpenStack threads.

BTW - in the 55 most recently active threads in openstack-dev, 8 of them
are for topics that are only of interest to 'official' OpenStack
projects. All 8 of them are properly prefixed and easy to ignore. There
are a few, like:

[openstack-dev] [Trove][Savanna][Murano] Unified Agent proposal
discussion at Summit

that involve integrated, incubated, and stackforge projects. But those
are still related to integrated or incubated, so I did not include them
in the 8.

For the record, I'm pasting the topics and message counts here:

[openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (48 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] New plug-ins requirements (7 messages)
[openstack-dev] Is Havana keystone rpm actually splitting identity and
assignment? (4 messages)
[openstack-dev] Using AD for keystone authentication only (9 messages)
[openstack-dev] Openstack + OpenContrail (2 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Glance] Summit Session Summaries (2 messages)
[openstack-dev] [nova][api] Is this a potential issue (11 messages)
[openstack-dev] sqlalchemy-migrate 0.8.1 (2 messages)
[openstack-dev] [qa] Proposals for Tempest core (5 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Heat] Continue discussing multi-region orchestration
(13 messages)
[openstack-dev] Congress: an open policy framework (10 messages)
[openstack-dev] [nova][object] One question to the resource tracker
session (11 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Solum] SFO Design Workshop
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Neutron Tempest code sprint - 2nd week of
January, Montreal, QC, Canada (27 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Troubleshooting OVS RPC API unit test error (3
messages)
[openstack-dev] sqlalchemy-migrate needs a new release (15 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Find the compute host on which a VM runs (2
messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Plugin and Driver Inclusion Requirements (4
messages)
[openstack-dev] Shall backward compatibility env. vars be removed from
python-clients? (6 messages)
[openstack-dev] [horizon] User registrations (9 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Heat] rough draft of Heat autoscaling API (26 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Solum] Command Line Interface for Solum (20 messages)
[openstack-dev] [nova] future fate of nova-network? (3 messages)

Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-16 Thread Matt Riedemann



On Saturday, November 16, 2013 2:09:35 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:



On 11/15/2013 12:08 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Adrian Otto wrote:

If OpenStack starts a culture of exclusion instead of inclusion, that would start a 
dangerous trend that sets the wrong tone. It would quickly reach the point where new 
projects like mine would simply not come here. We would go somewhere else that does have 
a culture of inclusion. We would not employ the values of open design and open 
collaboration, and we would be back to the throw stuff over the wall approach 
to open source. That would be a tragedy. Don't destroy the things about OpenStack's 
community that make it awesome.


It's definitely a trade-off between usability and community inclusion...
Trust me, I understand the value of cross-pollination, which is why I
wouldn't support a pure per-project split (as suggested elsewhere in
this thread). I'm just trying to find the right balance.


Because they ARE two different groups.


That thinking is backwards. From a community perspective we are not two 
different groups. Making us into two groups is a huge mistake.


I was talking about groups of projects. We have an incubation process to
decide when new projects are allowed to start tapping into OpenStack
common resources, like use an openstack/* repo, get into the integrated
gate, or tap into QA or release management dudes for guidance. I see
openstack-dev ML space as one of those common resources. Letting anyone
use it to talk about their new stackforge project has some cost, even if
it's an externality to you.

This is not about excluding anyone, it's about prioritizing our
resources. If we followed your line of thought, we should just abandon
the project incubation process because it's a way to prevent promising
projects from accessing resources they need in order to develop their
full potential.

Anyway, I don't expect to convince you, since you're clearly the one
benefiting the most from the current setup. I'm on the other end of the
spectrum, trying my best to keep my sanity with the ever-growing number
of things I need to keep an eye on :) And maybe the benefits of
unlimited cross-pollination are worth more than the drawback of forcing
everyone to process enormous email piles every day. (Filtering is an
option I have with well-behaved projects like Solum, I just fear it
would not work so well for less filterable threads.)


Can I suggest that you don't try purely mechanical filtering into
folders? Instead, for a while, try using a threaded client, and
configure it to show threads unexpanded by default. Then, when you're
going to read openstack-dev, you can scan the subject lines with your
eyes, which are AMAZINGLY good at pattern recognition and
contextualization. It's pretty easy to skip over the non-OpenStack threads.

BTW - in the 55 most recently active threads in openstack-dev, 8 of them
are for topics that are only of interest to 'official' OpenStack
projects. All 8 of them are properly prefixed and easy to ignore. There
are a few, like:

[openstack-dev] [Trove][Savanna][Murano] Unified Agent proposal
discussion at Summit

that involve integrated, incubated, and stackforge projects. But those
are still related to integrated or incubated, so I did not include them
in the 8.

For the record, I'm pasting the topics and message counts here:

[openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (48 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] New plug-ins requirements (7 messages)
[openstack-dev] Is Havana keystone rpm actually splitting identity and
assignment? (4 messages)
[openstack-dev] Using AD for keystone authentication only (9 messages)
[openstack-dev] Openstack + OpenContrail (2 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Glance] Summit Session Summaries (2 messages)
[openstack-dev] [nova][api] Is this a potential issue (11 messages)
[openstack-dev] sqlalchemy-migrate 0.8.1 (2 messages)
[openstack-dev] [qa] Proposals for Tempest core (5 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Heat] Continue discussing multi-region orchestration
(13 messages)
[openstack-dev] Congress: an open policy framework (10 messages)
[openstack-dev] [nova][object] One question to the resource tracker
session (11 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Solum] SFO Design Workshop
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Neutron Tempest code sprint - 2nd week of
January, Montreal, QC, Canada (27 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Troubleshooting OVS RPC API unit test error (3
messages)
[openstack-dev] sqlalchemy-migrate needs a new release (15 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Find the compute host on which a VM runs (2
messages)
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Plugin and Driver Inclusion Requirements (4
messages)
[openstack-dev] Shall backward compatibility env. vars be removed from
python-clients? (6 messages)
[openstack-dev] [horizon] User registrations (9 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Heat] rough draft of Heat autoscaling API (26 messages)
[openstack-dev] [Solum] Command Line Interface for Solum (20 messages)
[openstack-dev] [nova] future fate of 

Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-16 Thread Anita Kuno

On 11/16/2013 02:52 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:


On 11/15/2013 05:06 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Wow, lots of different opinions! let's try to summarize:

Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
* People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
* Traffic would drop by about 25%
* Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack

Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
* Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
* More chaos creates more innovation

Personally I was fine with having everyone in the same burgeoning city
(to quote the lyrical Clint) until we recently crossed the bar of making
that city painful for a lot of people. Especially the people who work on
serving the needs of all OpenStack projects (think release management,
doc, QA, infra) and who have to pay some level of attention to every thread.

Yes, those people can filter out all stackforge discussions into a
separate folder: identify all the corresponding prefixes and setting
filters for them (and praying that they would all just use the right
suffixes). But rather than forcing everyone to go through that setup,
why not set up a list and make it more convenient for everyone to apply
different (or similar !) reading rules to the two different groups.

Because they ARE two different groups. One is OpenStack and must get
the extra attention of all the people working on horizontal functions
(that is what incubation is about, carefully controlling access to extra
common resources). The other is not yet OpenStack, free-for-all. The
latter group clearly benefits from being on the same list: they get
extra attention from all those smart OpenStack people, and their
marketing can benefit from the very blurry line between openstack and
not-yet-openstack we maintain on the list.

I don't think this applies at the mailing list level. If someone wants
attention from the infra team, for instance, I certainly hope they don't
think they're going to get it by mentioning the need inside of a mailing
list thread and hoping we'll see it.

Mailing lists are for conversation and discussion. I see absolutely no
reason to segregate some of those conversations as real and others as
not. In fact, our original hard insistence that projects started off in
the corner until they magically one day became openstack is what got us
into the mess we've gone through originally with keystone (which needed
a complete from-scratch rewrite) and now with neutron.
I wouldn't have believed it until I witnessed it myself but yes, Monty 
is absolutely correct in this regard. I will be changing my vote on 
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56432/


Needing to see things for myself is why I am where I am, and while I am 
not comfortable where I am, it sure gives me a whole lot of information 
I didn't have before.

  Both of those
came about before we had more inclusive ways of projects growing themselves.

tl;dr Separation has been tried before, and it simple does not work.


In summary, I certainly see the benefits of a single list for stackforge
developers (and why people working on a limited number of vertical
projects don't really mind either way...). But I fear that we maintain
those benefits at the expense of the sanity of the horizontal programs
in openstack, and therefore lower the quality of OpenStack as a result.

PS: I don't think we can reach consensus on that one -- we might need to
push it to the TC to make a final call.


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-16 Thread Nick Chase
I am one of those horizontal people (working on docs and basically one of
the people responsible at my organization for keeping a handle on what's
going on) and I'm totally against a split.

Of COURSE we need to maintain the integrated/incubated/proposed spectrum.
Saying that we need to keep all traffic on one list isn't suggesting we do
away with that. But it IS a spectrum, and we should maintain that.
Splitting the list is definitely splitting the community and I agree that
it's a poison pill.

Integrating new projects into the community is just as important as
integrating them into the codebase.  Without one the other won't happen
nearly as effectively, and we do lose one of the strengths of the community
as a whole.

Part of this is psychology. Many of us are familiar with broken windows
theory[1] in terms of code.  For those of you who aren't, the idea is based
on an experiment where they left an expensive car in a crime-ridden
neighborhood and nothing happened to it -- until they broke a window.  In
coding it means you're less likely to kludge a patch to pristine code, but
once you do you are more likely to do it again.

Projects work hard to do things the OpenStack way because they feel from
the start that they are already part of OpenStack, even if they aren't
integrated.

It also leads to another side effect, which I'll leave to you to decide
whether it's good or bad.  We do have a culture of there can be only
one.  Once a project is proposed in a space, that's it (mostly).  We
typically don't have multiple projects in that space.  That's bad because
it reduces innovation through competition, but it's good because we get
focused development from the finite number of developers we have available.
As I said, YMMV.

Look, Monty is right: a good threaded client solves a multitude of
problems.  Definitely try that for a week before you set your mind on a
decision.

TL; DR Splitting the list is splitting the community, and that will lead to
a decline in overall quality.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-16 Thread Sean Dague
On 11/14/2013 02:25 PM, Mark Washenberger wrote:
 
 
 
 On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:19 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
 mailto:thie...@openstack.org wrote:
 
 Thierry Carrez wrote:
  [...]
  That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
  that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
  mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer
 off-topic
  questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be
 off-topic
  in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
  stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I
 hope that
  traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
  would be more manageable for everyone.
 
 Other suggestion: we could stop posting meeting reminders to -dev (I
 know, I'm guilty of it) and only post something if the meeting time
 changes, or if the weekly meeting is canceled for whatever reason.
 
 
 It seems excessive, I agree. But if your meeting time bounces on a
 biweekly schedule to accommodate multiple timezones, I think its quite
 necessary.

And the fact that people forget the times are in UTC

Honestly I'd be +1 for an openstack-meeting list where people posted
announces and minutes (should they wish). There are a subset of us that
would find that useful, and it would move the traffic off of -dev.

Honestly, I don't the QA meeting post to the main list because of
volume, but if we had a separate place for that, it would be cool.

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-16 Thread Miguel Angel
2013/11/16 Sean Dague s...@dague.net

 On 11/14/2013 02:25 PM, Mark Washenberger wrote: It seems excessive, I
 agree. But if your meeting time bounces on a
  biweekly schedule to accommodate multiple timezones, I think its quite
  necessary.

 And the fact that people forget the times are in UTC

 Honestly I'd be +1 for an openstack-meeting list where people posted
 announces and minutes (should they wish). There are a subset of us that
 would find that useful, and it would move the traffic off of -dev.


I totally agree with having an openstack-meeting list to keep us posted with
minutes and meetings.

+1

---
irc: ajo / mangelajo
Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
+34 636 52 25 69
skype: ajoajoajo
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-15 Thread Sylvain Bauza

Le 14/11/2013 20:46, Clint Byrum a écrit :


Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.



The problem is larger than only innovation, it is also making sure the 
Stackforge projects are also a starting point for contributing to 
Openstack in a different manner. ATCs can also get the opportunity to 
jump in another project on their spare time if they wish.
Isolating Stackforge projects into a separate mailing-list would then 
reduce visibility to Stackforge projects and as a consequence would 
reduce the permeability between Openstack and Stackforge.


On a technical note, as a Stackforge contributor, I'm trying to 
implement best practices of Openstack coding into my own project, and 
I'm facing day-to-day issues trying to understand what Oslo libs do or 
how they can be used in a fashion manner. Should I want to ask question 
to the community, I would have to cross-post to both lists.


One last point, having two different lists with most of people 
subscribing to both wouldn't help reduce the noise, as you would still 
get all the messages (maybe in two different folders, but still 
getting'em). I totally agree with the fact that openstack-dev@ is noisy. 
That said, we need to enforce the use of Subject headers and maybe 
accept meetings reminders are not relevant to be communicated using this 
channel (we could still notify people within the IRC rooms) and chase up 
any non-development question, that would be a first step for that.


One last thing I'm thinking about is logging IRC channel discussions so 
we could keep track of discussions over there, that would maybe help 
reducing the number of chatty messages we're sending off to the list 
just about implementation or reviews concerns.


2cts,
-Sylvain


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-15 Thread Alex Glikson
Sylvain Bauza sylvain.ba...@bull.net wrote on 15/11/2013 11:13:37 AM:

 On a technical note, as a Stackforge contributor, I'm trying to 
 implement best practices of Openstack coding into my own project, and 
 I'm facing day-to-day issues trying to understand what Oslo libs do or 
 how they can be used in a fashion manner. Should I want to ask question 
 to the community, I would have to cross-post to both lists.

+1

To generalize a bit, there are many stackforge projects which are tightly 
related to more mature OpenStack projects, and restricting the discussion 
to a subset of the audience might not be a good idea. For example, 
TaskFlow versus Mistral versus Heat, Solum versus Heat, Manila versus 
Cinder, Designate versus Neutron, and I am sure there are (and surely will 
be) other examples.
IMO, proper tagging could be a better solution.

Regards,
Alex
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Thierry Carrez
Wow, lots of different opinions! let's try to summarize:

Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
* People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
* Traffic would drop by about 25%
* Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack

Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
* Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
* More chaos creates more innovation

Personally I was fine with having everyone in the same burgeoning city
(to quote the lyrical Clint) until we recently crossed the bar of making
that city painful for a lot of people. Especially the people who work on
serving the needs of all OpenStack projects (think release management,
doc, QA, infra) and who have to pay some level of attention to every thread.

Yes, those people can filter out all stackforge discussions into a
separate folder: identify all the corresponding prefixes and setting
filters for them (and praying that they would all just use the right
suffixes). But rather than forcing everyone to go through that setup,
why not set up a list and make it more convenient for everyone to apply
different (or similar !) reading rules to the two different groups.

Because they ARE two different groups. One is OpenStack and must get
the extra attention of all the people working on horizontal functions
(that is what incubation is about, carefully controlling access to extra
common resources). The other is not yet OpenStack, free-for-all. The
latter group clearly benefits from being on the same list: they get
extra attention from all those smart OpenStack people, and their
marketing can benefit from the very blurry line between openstack and
not-yet-openstack we maintain on the list.

In summary, I certainly see the benefits of a single list for stackforge
developers (and why people working on a limited number of vertical
projects don't really mind either way...). But I fear that we maintain
those benefits at the expense of the sanity of the horizontal programs
in openstack, and therefore lower the quality of OpenStack as a result.

PS: I don't think we can reach consensus on that one -- we might need to
push it to the TC to make a final call.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 15/11/13 11:06 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Wow, lots of different opinions! let's try to summarize:

Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
* People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
* Traffic would drop by about 25%
* Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack



Again, +1 for splitting!


Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
* Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn


This can still happen. People can still subscribe to both lists and
reply / create threads as long as they belong to that list. This
'split' is more an 'organization' of emails than an actuall 'split'
because it's not intended to split the community but to ease the
interaction among it.

Cheers,
FF


* More chaos creates more innovation

Personally I was fine with having everyone in the same burgeoning city
(to quote the lyrical Clint) until we recently crossed the bar of making
that city painful for a lot of people. Especially the people who work on
serving the needs of all OpenStack projects (think release management,
doc, QA, infra) and who have to pay some level of attention to every thread.

Yes, those people can filter out all stackforge discussions into a
separate folder: identify all the corresponding prefixes and setting
filters for them (and praying that they would all just use the right
suffixes). But rather than forcing everyone to go through that setup,
why not set up a list and make it more convenient for everyone to apply
different (or similar !) reading rules to the two different groups.

Because they ARE two different groups. One is OpenStack and must get
the extra attention of all the people working on horizontal functions
(that is what incubation is about, carefully controlling access to extra
common resources). The other is not yet OpenStack, free-for-all. The
latter group clearly benefits from being on the same list: they get
extra attention from all those smart OpenStack people, and their
marketing can benefit from the very blurry line between openstack and
not-yet-openstack we maintain on the list.

In summary, I certainly see the benefits of a single list for stackforge
developers (and why people working on a limited number of vertical
projects don't really mind either way...). But I fear that we maintain
those benefits at the expense of the sanity of the horizontal programs
in openstack, and therefore lower the quality of OpenStack as a result.

PS: I don't think we can reach consensus on that one -- we might need to
push it to the TC to make a final call.

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Ruslan Kiianchuk
Definitely +1 for splitting -- it becomes overwhelmed. We'll soon need
regexps just to handle the incoming emails :) Having separate mailing lists
would make it easier to stay focused and concentrate on needed projects.


On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:

 On 15/11/13 11:06 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:

 Wow, lots of different opinions! let's try to summarize:

 Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
 * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
 * Traffic would drop by about 25%
 * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack


 Again, +1 for splitting!


  Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
 * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn


 This can still happen. People can still subscribe to both lists and
 reply / create threads as long as they belong to that list. This
 'split' is more an 'organization' of emails than an actuall 'split'
 because it's not intended to split the community but to ease the
 interaction among it.

 Cheers,
 FF


  * More chaos creates more innovation

 Personally I was fine with having everyone in the same burgeoning city
 (to quote the lyrical Clint) until we recently crossed the bar of making
 that city painful for a lot of people. Especially the people who work on
 serving the needs of all OpenStack projects (think release management,
 doc, QA, infra) and who have to pay some level of attention to every
 thread.

 Yes, those people can filter out all stackforge discussions into a
 separate folder: identify all the corresponding prefixes and setting
 filters for them (and praying that they would all just use the right
 suffixes). But rather than forcing everyone to go through that setup,
 why not set up a list and make it more convenient for everyone to apply
 different (or similar !) reading rules to the two different groups.

 Because they ARE two different groups. One is OpenStack and must get
 the extra attention of all the people working on horizontal functions
 (that is what incubation is about, carefully controlling access to extra
 common resources). The other is not yet OpenStack, free-for-all. The
 latter group clearly benefits from being on the same list: they get
 extra attention from all those smart OpenStack people, and their
 marketing can benefit from the very blurry line between openstack and
 not-yet-openstack we maintain on the list.

 In summary, I certainly see the benefits of a single list for stackforge
 developers (and why people working on a limited number of vertical
 projects don't really mind either way...). But I fear that we maintain
 those benefits at the expense of the sanity of the horizontal programs
 in openstack, and therefore lower the quality of OpenStack as a result.

 PS: I don't think we can reach consensus on that one -- we might need to
 push it to the TC to make a final call.

 --
 Thierry Carrez (ttx)

 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


 --
 @flaper87
 Flavio Percoco


 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




-- 
Sincerely, Ruslan Kiianchuk.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Adrian Otto

On Nov 15, 2013, at 2:06 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:

 Wow, lots of different opinions! let's try to summarize:
 
 Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
 * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
 * Traffic would drop by about 25%
 * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack

Few of us actually try to read all the email sent to openstack-dev. Category 
filtering features are available in our list server already, and I expect all 
of us routinely use filtering techniques to manage email volume.

 Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
 * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
 * More chaos creates more innovation

The value of cross-pollination and innovation is profound, and should not be 
understated.

These are key aspects of the OpenStack community ecosystem that make it 
attractive to new innovators. If you erode the value of community collaboration 
by making a second class community, it will certainly stunt growth, and the 
total value of the community will fade. In my view the community aspects of 
open design and development are the magic that has made OpenStack successful. 
The current setup encourages new projects that are closely integrated with 
other OpenStack projects.

For example, when I have a Heat+Solum integration concern, I can label the 
message with [Heat][Solum] and we can easily have a cross-group conversation. 
If there were two separate lists, this would require me to cross post, and all 
of us that participate on both teams would get two copies of the message and 
every reply to each of the threads. It would show up in two different message 
archives. Yuck! That would motivate us to have the conversation only on 
openstack-dev which would probably reduce the number of Solum developers that 
would see it. This would certainly slow down innovation.

I am bringing new developers into this ecosystem, and teaching them the 
OpenStack way of doing things. These developers will integrate into the 
community and begin working on other OpenStack projects like Keystone, and 
Oslo, and Heat, and other community projects that are not yet incubated. 
Everyone benefits.

So you should add:

* supports growth of community
* results in the improvement in the overall quality of OpenStack

 Personally I was fine with having everyone in the same burgeoning city
 (to quote the lyrical Clint) until we recently crossed the bar of making
 that city painful for a lot of people. Especially the people who work on
 serving the needs of all OpenStack projects (think release management,
 doc, QA, infra) and who have to pay some level of attention to every thread.
 
 Yes, those people can filter out all stackforge discussions into a
 separate folder: identify all the corresponding prefixes and setting
 filters for them (and praying that they would all just use the right
 suffixes).

We do actually use the right tags in the subject. This solution would work fine 
for reduction of volume.

 But rather than forcing everyone to go through that setup,
 why not set up a list and make it more convenient for everyone to apply
 different (or similar !) reading rules to the two different groups.

Because the value of innovation in our community justifies some email client 
configuration by those of us who have special roles.

If OpenStack starts a culture of exclusion instead of inclusion, that would 
start a dangerous trend that sets the wrong tone. It would quickly reach the 
point where new projects like mine would simply not come here. We would go 
somewhere else that does have a culture of inclusion. We would not employ the 
values of open design and open collaboration, and we would be back to the 
throw stuff over the wall approach to open source. That would be a tragedy. 
Don't destroy the things about OpenStack's community that make it awesome.

 Because they ARE two different groups.

That thinking is backwards. From a community perspective we are not two 
different groups. Making us into two groups is a huge mistake.

 One is OpenStack and must get
 the extra attention of all the people working on horizontal functions
 (that is what incubation is about, carefully controlling access to extra
 common resources). The other is not yet OpenStack, free-for-all. The
 latter group clearly benefits from being on the same list: they get
 extra attention from all those smart OpenStack people, and their
 marketing can benefit from the very blurry line between openstack and
 not-yet-openstack we maintain on the list.
 
 In summary, I certainly see the benefits of a single list for stackforge
 developers (and why people working on a limited number of vertical
 projects don't really mind either way...). But I fear that we maintain
 those benefits at the expense of the sanity of the horizontal programs
 in openstack, and therefore lower the quality of OpenStack as a result.

If we take the action you are 

Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Thierry Carrez
Adrian Otto wrote:
 If OpenStack starts a culture of exclusion instead of inclusion, that would 
 start a dangerous trend that sets the wrong tone. It would quickly reach the 
 point where new projects like mine would simply not come here. We would go 
 somewhere else that does have a culture of inclusion. We would not employ the 
 values of open design and open collaboration, and we would be back to the 
 throw stuff over the wall approach to open source. That would be a tragedy. 
 Don't destroy the things about OpenStack's community that make it awesome.

It's definitely a trade-off between usability and community inclusion...
Trust me, I understand the value of cross-pollination, which is why I
wouldn't support a pure per-project split (as suggested elsewhere in
this thread). I'm just trying to find the right balance.

 Because they ARE two different groups.
 
 That thinking is backwards. From a community perspective we are not two 
 different groups. Making us into two groups is a huge mistake.

I was talking about groups of projects. We have an incubation process to
decide when new projects are allowed to start tapping into OpenStack
common resources, like use an openstack/* repo, get into the integrated
gate, or tap into QA or release management dudes for guidance. I see
openstack-dev ML space as one of those common resources. Letting anyone
use it to talk about their new stackforge project has some cost, even if
it's an externality to you.

This is not about excluding anyone, it's about prioritizing our
resources. If we followed your line of thought, we should just abandon
the project incubation process because it's a way to prevent promising
projects from accessing resources they need in order to develop their
full potential.

Anyway, I don't expect to convince you, since you're clearly the one
benefiting the most from the current setup. I'm on the other end of the
spectrum, trying my best to keep my sanity with the ever-growing number
of things I need to keep an eye on :) And maybe the benefits of
unlimited cross-pollination are worth more than the drawback of forcing
everyone to process enormous email piles every day. (Filtering is an
option I have with well-behaved projects like Solum, I just fear it
would not work so well for less filterable threads.)

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On 11/15/2013 02:06 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
 * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
 * Traffic would drop by about 25%

I'm not so convinced about this figure, as others pointed out.

 * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack
 
 Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
 * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
 * More chaos creates more innovation

chaos creates just chaos in this context :) I don't buy Clint's rhetoric
applied to this case :)

Anyway, I've looked at my folder and it looks like 90% of the messages
to openstack-dev have topics in the subject line. Filtering on the
client side should be easy to do and I'd like to have a few volunteers
run an experiment over one week to see if filters can ease the pain.

I'd also like to get to an agreement that support requests sent to
openstack-dev should not be answered and instead should be redirected
gently to openstack@lists. and/or ask.openstack.org.

Maybe we can restart this conversation in a week and see how things are
going?

/stef



-- 
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Stefano Maffulli's message of 2013-11-15 09:12:05 -0800:
 On 11/15/2013 02:06 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
  Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
  * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
  * Traffic would drop by about 25%
 
 I'm not so convinced about this figure, as others pointed out.
 
  * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack
  
  Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
  * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
  * More chaos creates more innovation
 
 chaos creates just chaos in this context :) I don't buy Clint's rhetoric
 applied to this case :)
 

You say that like chaos is all bad. The trade-off is that the chaos
create's chain reactions often leading to _more_ energy being released.
This is not always the most efficient use of energy, but it does unlock
energy that may never have been realized. I have to wonder if Mistral
would have been created the way it was if TaskFlow discussions were
divided between the core list and stackforge list.

I think this is rather interesting, that we are debating how to scale a
list of compute nodes that we call developers by effectively creating
cells. We all know that this only solves one problem and now creates
another one. One cell can still be overloaded. The balance between the
two is simply not going to hold true.

Perhaps the answer is instead to look at why the compute nodes feel that
they need to look at every single broadcast topic. Are we all using
horrible email clients (probably, because all email clients are
horrible) or are we just inept? Could we benefit from some training on
this subject? Better tools? A cultural acceptance that some people will
likely miss some messages?

 Anyway, I've looked at my folder and it looks like 90% of the messages
 to openstack-dev have topics in the subject line. Filtering on the
 client side should be easy to do and I'd like to have a few volunteers
 run an experiment over one week to see if filters can ease the pain.


I don't filter at all. I use sup-mail, which is an unmaintained ruby
based client like notmuch that has one benefit worth using an unmaintained
ruby anything. It very easily allows killing threads without deleting
them. This means that as soon as I see a subject line is not interesting,
I press  on the thread, and it is gone from my view. Until I do a local
search with '\', which then searches the local xapian index and may show
killed threads. Neat huh?  This may be why I don't favor splitting,
because I don't get overwhelmed by long threads.. they're gone 1 or 2
messages in.

I'm not suggesting that everybody switch to sup. But rather that we try
to investigate why the list is overwhelming people before we just split
it in two, which I do believe will have large unintended and difficult
to detect consequences.

 I'd also like to get to an agreement that support requests sent to
 openstack-dev should not be answered and instead should be redirected
 gently to openstack@lists. and/or ask.openstack.org.
 

My general sense is that this is already happening.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Joshua Harlow
Another thing that I remember from talking with people who work at yahoo
on the hadoop project and was an insight early on for me. I remember those
folks saying that about 2 hours of there day is spent on catching up on
mailing list emails and reviews. This is/was a change in how they operated
when they joined the hadoop (or related hadoop project) and my guess is
that this same change is happening to people in the openstack project (and
it does take some getting used to).

I also agree with the sentiment that clint has stated, where I honestly
agree that the 'chaos' is actually beneficial for a new project like
openstack (newish I guess). Without that 'chaos' I do agree that we would
not have as much innovation or cross-pollination among projects, which to
me means that we start going down a path of silos (which is bad, and
believe me at yahoo I know all about silos).

TLDR: opensource projects take some getting used to, especially with
regards to emails and reviews, but IMHO lets keep the chaos until
openstack is more mature (if that ever occurs?).

On 11/15/13 9:51 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:

Excerpts from Stefano Maffulli's message of 2013-11-15 09:12:05 -0800:
 On 11/15/2013 02:06 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
  Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
  * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
  * Traffic would drop by about 25%
 
 I'm not so convinced about this figure, as others pointed out.
 
  * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack
  
  Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
  * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
  * More chaos creates more innovation
 
 chaos creates just chaos in this context :) I don't buy Clint's rhetoric
 applied to this case :)
 

You say that like chaos is all bad. The trade-off is that the chaos
create's chain reactions often leading to _more_ energy being released.
This is not always the most efficient use of energy, but it does unlock
energy that may never have been realized. I have to wonder if Mistral
would have been created the way it was if TaskFlow discussions were
divided between the core list and stackforge list.

I think this is rather interesting, that we are debating how to scale a
list of compute nodes that we call developers by effectively creating
cells. We all know that this only solves one problem and now creates
another one. One cell can still be overloaded. The balance between the
two is simply not going to hold true.

Perhaps the answer is instead to look at why the compute nodes feel that
they need to look at every single broadcast topic. Are we all using
horrible email clients (probably, because all email clients are
horrible) or are we just inept? Could we benefit from some training on
this subject? Better tools? A cultural acceptance that some people will
likely miss some messages?

 Anyway, I've looked at my folder and it looks like 90% of the messages
 to openstack-dev have topics in the subject line. Filtering on the
 client side should be easy to do and I'd like to have a few volunteers
 run an experiment over one week to see if filters can ease the pain.


I don't filter at all. I use sup-mail, which is an unmaintained ruby
based client like notmuch that has one benefit worth using an unmaintained
ruby anything. It very easily allows killing threads without deleting
them. This means that as soon as I see a subject line is not interesting,
I press  on the thread, and it is gone from my view. Until I do a local
search with '\', which then searches the local xapian index and may show
killed threads. Neat huh?  This may be why I don't favor splitting,
because I don't get overwhelmed by long threads.. they're gone 1 or 2
messages in.

I'm not suggesting that everybody switch to sup. But rather that we try
to investigate why the list is overwhelming people before we just split
it in two, which I do believe will have large unintended and difficult
to detect consequences.

 I'd also like to get to an agreement that support requests sent to
 openstack-dev should not be answered and instead should be redirected
 gently to openstack@lists. and/or ask.openstack.org.
 

My general sense is that this is already happening.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list (summary so far)

2013-11-15 Thread Rochelle.Grober
Coming from QA/Ops, I agree that there are horizontal teams that need to get 
info from the mailing list(s) across the spectrum.  I also agree with Clint's 
and Adrian's statements about the synergies and serendipities of all the 
developers on one list.  But I also understand the feeling of drowning in email.

I would like to present a solution that was employed on another development 
project I participated in.  We are already using key words for projects, and 
I've seen the use of [RFC].  In the other project, we had key words for the 
stage each thread was in:

   Proposed
   Discussion
   Decision
   Request
   Info

These tags (no brackets but all caps) allowed those of us who needed to know 
details but not follow the discussion to get the resolved decision easily.  
And, yes, it made filtering pretty easy.

Perhaps a collection of keywords for status as well as project could help in 
reducing the noise for various participants.

Just a humble observation.

--Rocky


From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stef...@openstack.org] 

On 11/15/2013 02:06 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
 * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
 * Traffic would drop by about 25%

I'm not so convinced about this figure, as others pointed out.

 * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually in openstack
 
 Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
 * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
 * More chaos creates more innovation

chaos creates just chaos in this context :) I don't buy Clint's rhetoric
applied to this case :)

Anyway, I've looked at my folder and it looks like 90% of the messages
to openstack-dev have topics in the subject line. Filtering on the
client side should be easy to do and I'd like to have a few volunteers
run an experiment over one week to see if filters can ease the pain.

I'd also like to get to an agreement that support requests sent to
openstack-dev should not be answered and instead should be redirected
gently to openstack@lists. and/or ask.openstack.org.

Maybe we can restart this conversation in a week and see how things are
going?

/stef



-- 
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-15 Thread Alex Freedland
Agree with Clint completely! In my opinion it would be a big mistake to
separate the lists. There are tools in modern e-mail readers to filter
specific content into separate views. Why should OpenStack Foundation do it
for us?

Alex Freedland
Co-Founder and Chairman
Mirantis, Inc.




On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:

 Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2013-11-14 05:12:55 -0800:
  Hi everyone,
 
  I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
  openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
  November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
  off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
  them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
  definition of what we include in openstack development.
 
  Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:
 
  *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
  official projects
 
  *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted
 projects
 
  Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
  stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
  openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
  incubated  integrated projects).
 
  That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
  (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
  Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
  on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
  filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
  tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.
 
  That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
  that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
  mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
  questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
  in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
  stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
  traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
  would be more manageable for everyone.
 

 Allow me an analogy if you will:

 Consider a burgeoning city. There are people who have been around a long
 time. Some are politicians, some work for the city, some are just good
 citizens. These people see newcomers in the commons and greet them with
 open arms. Those who have only been around a while see those and see that
 this is a city where new people are welcome, and they do the same as the
 old timers, welcoming new residents and visitors alike, and they also
 feel even more welcome than before they noticed that. Though newcomers
 must wait a while and gain the trust of the old-timers to call themselves
 citizens, they are already encouraged to participate in discussions at
 every level and to organize themselves in the same way as the old-timers.

 Now consider a different city. Things are quiet in the commons. Newcomers
 are greeted with a sign. Newcomers over there-. That part of town is
 unknown to the rest of the world. It has less infrastructure. It also
 has very little representation in the government. The line is very clear
 between the citizens and the newcomers. When the newcomers want to become
 full citizens, they have to go before a council of old-timers, some of
 whom have specifically decided to ignore newcomers until this moment.

 Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.

 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-15 Thread Monty Taylor


On 11/15/2013 04:13 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
 Le 14/11/2013 20:46, Clint Byrum a écrit :

 Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.

 
 The problem is larger than only innovation, it is also making sure the
 Stackforge projects are also a starting point for contributing to
 Openstack in a different manner. ATCs can also get the opportunity to
 jump in another project on their spare time if they wish.
 Isolating Stackforge projects into a separate mailing-list would then
 reduce visibility to Stackforge projects and as a consequence would
 reduce the permeability between Openstack and Stackforge.
 
 On a technical note, as a Stackforge contributor, I'm trying to
 implement best practices of Openstack coding into my own project, and
 I'm facing day-to-day issues trying to understand what Oslo libs do or
 how they can be used in a fashion manner. Should I want to ask question
 to the community, I would have to cross-post to both lists.
 
 One last point, having two different lists with most of people
 subscribing to both wouldn't help reduce the noise, as you would still
 get all the messages (maybe in two different folders, but still
 getting'em). I totally agree with the fact that openstack-dev@ is noisy.
 That said, we need to enforce the use of Subject headers and maybe
 accept meetings reminders are not relevant to be communicated using this
 channel (we could still notify people within the IRC rooms) and chase up
 any non-development question, that would be a first step for that.
 
 One last thing I'm thinking about is logging IRC channel discussions so
 we could keep track of discussions over there, that would maybe help
 reducing the number of chatty messages we're sending off to the list
 just about implementation or reviews concerns.

IRC channels are currently able to be logged, and several of them are.

http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/

If you have another channel you want logged, it's totally an easily
requestable thing.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-15 Thread Monty Taylor


On 11/14/2013 02:46 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
 Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2013-11-14 05:12:55 -0800:
 Hi everyone,

 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.

 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects

 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects

 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
 incubated  integrated projects).

 That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
 (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
 Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
 on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
 filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
 tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.

 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
 would be more manageable for everyone.

 
 Allow me an analogy if you will:
 
 Consider a burgeoning city. There are people who have been around a long
 time. Some are politicians, some work for the city, some are just good
 citizens. These people see newcomers in the commons and greet them with
 open arms. Those who have only been around a while see those and see that
 this is a city where new people are welcome, and they do the same as the
 old timers, welcoming new residents and visitors alike, and they also
 feel even more welcome than before they noticed that. Though newcomers
 must wait a while and gain the trust of the old-timers to call themselves
 citizens, they are already encouraged to participate in discussions at
 every level and to organize themselves in the same way as the old-timers.
 
 Now consider a different city. Things are quiet in the commons. Newcomers
 are greeted with a sign. Newcomers over there-. That part of town is
 unknown to the rest of the world. It has less infrastructure. It also
 has very little representation in the government. The line is very clear
 between the citizens and the newcomers. When the newcomers want to become
 full citizens, they have to go before a council of old-timers, some of
 whom have specifically decided to ignore newcomers until this moment.
 
 Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.

I agree with this 100%.

I think that splitting the lists is a mistake. My email client helps me
cope with the traffic just fine. I use Thunderbird, and I have
openstack-dev threaded. I can typically tell in a quick scan of the
topics which ones I need to read.

The whole point of stackforge is that we want to be an inviting place
for collaboration, not a closed tower of special people.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-15 Thread Monty Taylor


On 11/14/2013 07:54 PM, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
 On 11/14/2013 5:12 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Hi everyone,

 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.

 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects

 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted
 projects

 
 I would suggest that each *established* project (core or incubator) have
 its own mailing list, and that openstack-dev be reserved for
 topics of potential interest across multiple projects (which new
 projects would qualify as).

We've actually explicitly avoiding this model for quite some time on
purpose. The main reason being that one of the hardest challenges we
have is cross-project collaboration. Hacking just one one project? Not
so hard. Producing the output of 18 in a coordinated fashion? Hard.

Everyone does a great job so far of prefixing things.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Thierry Carrez
Thierry Carrez wrote:
 [...]
 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
 would be more manageable for everyone.

Other suggestion: we could stop posting meeting reminders to -dev (I
know, I'm guilty of it) and only post something if the meeting time
changes, or if the weekly meeting is canceled for whatever reason.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Julien Danjou
On Thu, Nov 14 2013, Thierry Carrez wrote:

 Other suggestion: we could stop posting meeting reminders to -dev (I
 know, I'm guilty of it) and only post something if the meeting time
 changes, or if the weekly meeting is canceled for whatever reason.

Good suggestion.

-- 
Julien Danjou
-- Free Software hacker - independent consultant
-- http://julien.danjou.info


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Julien Danjou
On Thu, Nov 14 2013, Thierry Carrez wrote:

 Thoughts ?

I agree on the need to split, the traffic is getting huge.

As I'd have to subscribe to both openstack-dev and stackforge-dev, that
would not help me personally, but I think it can be an easy and first
step.

-- 
Julien Danjou
-- Free Software hacker - independent consultant
-- http://julien.danjou.info


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Dina Belova
Yeah, that's big problem... Especially when you are trying to keep track on
lots of topics...
I suppose this solution will do letters' prioritisation at least easier for
developers and everybody who is subscribed on openstack-dev.

Nice idea.


On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:

 Hi everyone,

 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.

 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects

 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects

 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
 incubated  integrated projects).

 That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
 (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
 Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
 on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
 filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
 tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.

 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
 would be more manageable for everyone.

 Thoughts ?

 --
 Thierry Carrez (ttx)

 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




-- 

Best regards,

Dina Belova

Software Engineer

Mirantis Inc.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 02:19:24PM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Thierry Carrez wrote:
  [...]
  That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
  that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
  mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
  questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
  in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
  stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
  traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
  would be more manageable for everyone.
 
 Other suggestion: we could stop posting meeting reminders to -dev (I
 know, I'm guilty of it) and only post something if the meeting time
 changes, or if the weekly meeting is canceled for whatever reason.

Is there somewhere on the website which keeps a record of all regular
scheduled meetings people can discover / refer to easily ?

Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com  -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org   -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org   -o-   http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Julien Danjou
On Thu, Nov 14 2013, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:

 Is there somewhere on the website which keeps a record of all regular
 scheduled meetings people can discover / refer to easily ?

It's all on the wiki:

  https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings

-- 
Julien Danjou
// Free Software hacker / independent consultant
// http://julien.danjou.info


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Stephen Gran

On 14/11/13 13:23, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:


Is there somewhere on the website which keeps a record of all regular
scheduled meetings people can discover / refer to easily ?


https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings

Cheers,
--
Stephen Gran
Senior Systems Integrator - theguardian.com
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
--
Visit theguardian.com   

On your mobile, download the Guardian iPhone app theguardian.com/iphone and our iPad edition theguardian.com/iPad   
Save up to 33% by subscribing to the Guardian and Observer - choose the papers you want and get full digital access.

Visit subscribe.theguardian.com

This e-mail and all attachments are confidential and may also
be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify
the sender and delete the e-mail and all attachments immediately.
Do not disclose the contents to another person. You may not use
the information for any purpose, or store, or copy, it in any way.

Guardian News  Media Limited is not liable for any computer
viruses or other material transmitted with or as part of this
e-mail. You should employ virus checking software.

Guardian News  Media Limited

A member of Guardian Media Group plc
Registered Office
PO Box 68164
Kings Place
90 York Way
London
N1P 2AP

Registered in England Number 908396

--


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread mark
This would also have the added benefit of reducing the times people conflate 
related open source projects from stackforge with OpenStack itself. Having 
related oss discussions on a list called OpenStack-Dev may certainly have 
given the wrong impression to the casual observer. 


On Nov 14, 2013 7:12 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:

 Hi everyone, 

 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the 
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and 
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just 
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of 
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the 
 definition of what we include in openstack development. 

 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists: 

 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack 
 official projects 

 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects 

 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in 
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while 
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including 
 incubated  integrated projects). 

 That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano 
 (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev. 
 Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos 
 on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier 
 filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in 
 tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists. 

 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure 
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general 
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic 
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic 
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly 
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that 
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which 
 would be more manageable for everyone. 

 Thoughts ? 

 -- 
 Thierry Carrez (ttx) 

 ___ 
 OpenStack-dev mailing list 
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org 
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev 
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Thierry Carrez
Julien Danjou wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 14 2013, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 
 Thoughts ?
 
 I agree on the need to split, the traffic is getting huge.
 
 As I'd have to subscribe to both openstack-dev and stackforge-dev, that
 would not help me personally, but I think it can be an easy and first
 step.

Personally I would also subscribe to both, but I would not parse them
with the exact same level of attention -- having them land in two
separate folders would certainly help me.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Sean Dague
On 11/14/2013 08:12 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Hi everyone,
 
 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.
 
 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:
 
 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects
 
 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects
 
 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
 incubated  integrated projects).

+1

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 14/11/13 14:12 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Hi everyone,

I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
definition of what we include in openstack development.

Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

*openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
official projects

*stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects

Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
incubated  integrated projects).

That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
(stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.

That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
would be more manageable for everyone.

Thoughts ?


+1

I'll most likely subscribe to both but I still think splitting them is
the way to go.

Cheers,
FF

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Jay Pipes

++

On 11/14/2013 08:37 AM, m...@openstack.org wrote:

This would also have the added benefit of reducing the times people conflate related open 
source projects from stackforge with OpenStack itself. Having related oss discussions on 
a list called OpenStack-Dev may certainly have given the wrong impression to 
the casual observer.


On Nov 14, 2013 7:12 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:


Hi everyone,

I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
definition of what we include in openstack development.

Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

*openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
official projects

*stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects

Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
incubated  integrated projects).

That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
(stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.

That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
would be more manageable for everyone.

Thoughts ?

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Anne Gentle
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:

 Hi everyone,

 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.

 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects

 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects

 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
 incubated  integrated projects).

 That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
 (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
 Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
 on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
 filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
 tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.

 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
 would be more manageable for everyone.

 Thoughts ?


Sounds good.



 --
 Thierry Carrez (ttx)

 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




-- 
Anne Gentle
annegen...@justwriteclick.com
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Sergey Lukjanov
+1, agreed.

Personally, I’ll subscribe to both lists but I think it really could help to 
prioritize emails.

Sincerely yours,
Sergey Lukjanov
Savanna Technical Lead
Mirantis Inc.

On Nov 14, 2013, at 5:12 PM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:

 Hi everyone,
 
 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.
 
 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:
 
 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects
 
 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects
 
 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
 incubated  integrated projects).
 
 That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
 (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
 Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
 on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
 filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
 tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.
 
 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
 would be more manageable for everyone.
 
 Thoughts ?
 
 -- 
 Thierry Carrez (ttx)
 
 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Chmouel Boudjnah
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Julien Danjou jul...@danjou.info wrote:

  Other suggestion: we could stop posting meeting reminders to -dev (I
  know, I'm guilty of it) and only post something if the meeting time
  changes, or if the weekly meeting is canceled for whatever reason.

 Good suggestion.


Or this can be moved to the announcement list?

Chmouel.
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Romain Hardouin
Good idea.

-romain

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Joe Gordon
On Nov 14, 2013 5:16 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:

 Hi everyone,

 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.

 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects

 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted
projects

 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
 incubated  integrated projects).

 That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
 (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
 Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
 on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
 filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
 tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.

 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
 would be more manageable for everyone.

 Thoughts ?

++

How soon can we do this?


 --
 Thierry Carrez (ttx)

 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread David Ripton

On 11/14/2013 08:21 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:

On Thu, Nov 14 2013, Thierry Carrez wrote:


Thoughts ?


I agree on the need to split, the traffic is getting huge.

As I'd have to subscribe to both openstack-dev and stackforge-dev, that
would not help me personally, but I think it can be an easy and first
step.


I don't think it's worth the bother.  openstack-dev would still receive 
most of the traffic.  Once you add back the traffic from people 
cross-posting, posting to the wrong list, yelling at people 
cross-posting or posting to the wrong list, etc. I'd expect 
openstack-dev's traffic to stay about the same.  It'll just be one more 
list for most of us to subscribe to.


The thing that would help with message volume would be splitting 
openstack-dev by subproject.  (Except for those who would need to follow 
most of the projects, who would still get just as much mail plus the 
extra noise from people posting wrong.)


--
David Ripton   Red Hat   drip...@redhat.com

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2013-11-14 14:12:55 +0100 (+0100), Thierry Carrez wrote:
[...]
 I'd like to propose a split between two lists:
 
 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects
 
 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects
[...]

Consider this my vote in favor:

https://review.openstack.org/56432

(though I'd love if someone would step forward to be the list admin
for it instead of me!)
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On 11/14/2013 09:03 AM, David Ripton wrote:
 I don't think it's worth the bother.  openstack-dev would still receive
 most of the traffic.  Once you add back the traffic from people
 cross-posting, posting to the wrong list, yelling at people
 cross-posting or posting to the wrong list, etc. I'd expect
 openstack-dev's traffic to stay about the same.  It'll just be one more
 list for most of us to subscribe to.

I think you're right. Given the amount of people that replied saying
that they would subscribe to both lists anyway I think we should think
about this a bit more.

Since we are getting very good at marking subject lines with explicit
topics, would it make sense to suggest people to filter stackforge and
related projects based on subjects?

 The thing that would help with message volume would be splitting
 openstack-dev by subproject.  

We already have a mechanism in place with mailman topics and, despite
the limitations of mailman, I think they did a pretty good job at
teaching people to add a tag to the subject line. I think that's a
pretty solid way to filter messages to this list.

I am concerned a lot about off topic traffic though. I think we have to
be a lot more strict and redirect questions that are not about the
*future* of OpenStack development to the General list or Ask OpenStack.

/stef

-- 
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Mark Washenberger
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:19 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:

 Thierry Carrez wrote:
  [...]
  That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
  that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
  mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
  questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
  in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
  stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
  traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
  would be more manageable for everyone.

 Other suggestion: we could stop posting meeting reminders to -dev (I
 know, I'm guilty of it) and only post something if the meeting time
 changes, or if the weekly meeting is canceled for whatever reason.


It seems excessive, I agree. But if your meeting time bounces on a biweekly
schedule to accommodate multiple timezones, I think its quite necessary.



 --
 Thierry Carrez (ttx)

 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2013-11-14 05:12:55 -0800:
 Hi everyone,
 
 I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
 openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
 November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
 off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
 them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
 definition of what we include in openstack development.
 
 Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:
 
 *openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
 official projects
 
 *stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects
 
 Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
 stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
 openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
 incubated  integrated projects).
 
 That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
 (stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
 Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
 on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
 filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
 tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.
 
 That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
 that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
 mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
 questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
 in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
 stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
 traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
 would be more manageable for everyone.
 

Allow me an analogy if you will:

Consider a burgeoning city. There are people who have been around a long
time. Some are politicians, some work for the city, some are just good
citizens. These people see newcomers in the commons and greet them with
open arms. Those who have only been around a while see those and see that
this is a city where new people are welcome, and they do the same as the
old timers, welcoming new residents and visitors alike, and they also
feel even more welcome than before they noticed that. Though newcomers
must wait a while and gain the trust of the old-timers to call themselves
citizens, they are already encouraged to participate in discussions at
every level and to organize themselves in the same way as the old-timers.

Now consider a different city. Things are quiet in the commons. Newcomers
are greeted with a sign. Newcomers over there-. That part of town is
unknown to the rest of the world. It has less infrastructure. It also
has very little representation in the government. The line is very clear
between the citizens and the newcomers. When the newcomers want to become
full citizens, they have to go before a council of old-timers, some of
whom have specifically decided to ignore newcomers until this moment.

Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Joe Gordon
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Stefano Maffulli stef...@openstack.orgwrote:

 On 11/14/2013 09:03 AM, David Ripton wrote:
  I don't think it's worth the bother.  openstack-dev would still receive
  most of the traffic.  Once you add back the traffic from people
  cross-posting, posting to the wrong list, yelling at people
  cross-posting or posting to the wrong list, etc. I'd expect
  openstack-dev's traffic to stay about the same.  It'll just be one more
  list for most of us to subscribe to.

 I think you're right. Given the amount of people that replied saying
 that they would subscribe to both lists anyway I think we should think
 about this a bit more.


FWIW I would not subscribe to both, while I am interested in watching the
progress of stackforge projects there are only so many hours in the day.


 Since we are getting very good at marking subject lines with explicit
 topics, would it make sense to suggest people to filter stackforge and
 related projects based on subjects?



This may be a silly question, but what is the best way to filter out
stackforge and related projects? Should I make a local filter and whitelist
all integrated projects?



  The thing that would help with message volume would be splitting
  openstack-dev by subproject.

 We already have a mechanism in place with mailman topics and, despite
 the limitations of mailman, I think they did a pretty good job at
 teaching people to add a tag to the subject line. I think that's a
 pretty solid way to filter messages to this list.


 I am concerned a lot about off topic traffic though. I think we have to
 be a lot more strict and redirect questions that are not about the
 *future* of OpenStack development to the General list or Ask OpenStack.


+1, to being stricter about this.  Did you just volunteer to be the off
topic czar?


 /stef

 --
 Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org

 ___
 OpenStack-dev mailing list
 OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Anita Kuno

On 11/14/2013 02:46 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:

Allow me an analogy if you will:

Consider a burgeoning city. There are people who have been around a long
time. Some are politicians, some work for the city, some are just good
citizens. These people see newcomers in the commons and greet them with
open arms. Those who have only been around a while see those and see that
this is a city where new people are welcome, and they do the same as the
old timers, welcoming new residents and visitors alike, and they also
feel even more welcome than before they noticed that. Though newcomers
must wait a while and gain the trust of the old-timers to call themselves
citizens, they are already encouraged to participate in discussions at
every level and to organize themselves in the same way as the old-timers.

Now consider a different city. Things are quiet in the commons. Newcomers
are greeted with a sign. Newcomers over there-. That part of town is
unknown to the rest of the world. It has less infrastructure. It also
has very little representation in the government. The line is very clear
between the citizens and the newcomers. When the newcomers want to become
full citizens, they have to go before a council of old-timers, some of
whom have specifically decided to ignore newcomers until this moment.

Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.

You do have the best stories.

Here is what I am feeling.
I wonder what percentage of posts from stackforge projects are posts 
dealing with development details and what percentage of the posts are 
marketing?


I have no stomach for the marketing but no idea how to reduce its 
prevalance from the new projects. If the lists are split I don't have to 
have the marketing while consuming (or trying to consume) the news.


So no solution, just my perspective.

Thanks,
Anita.


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On 11/14/2013 11:46 AM, Clint Byrum wrote:
 Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.

This is not about welcoming newcomers. It's about teaching newcomers the
tools, habits, culture of an established community that keeps growing.

If questions about usage need to be asked on the General list, that's
where they need to go. Newcomers can be educated, nicely and
productively, without compromising on the functions of each list.

/stef

-- 
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Tom Fifield
On 15/11/13 02:40, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
 
 On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Julien Danjou jul...@danjou.info
 mailto:jul...@danjou.info wrote:
 
  Other suggestion: we could stop posting meeting reminders to -dev (I
  know, I'm guilty of it) and only post something if the meeting time
  changes, or if the weekly meeting is canceled for whatever reason.
 
 Good suggestion.
 
 
 Or this can be moved to the announcement list?

It's my impression that the announce list has a different purpose than
such mundane things as weekly meeting reminders :)

Announces about OpenStack new releases, stable releases and security
advisories

I'd think that based on the description (and in some sense how we've
communicated it) that list would be quite low traffic - like 1-2
messages per month.


However, do  you think an devel-announce or meeting-announce list would
be valuable?


Regards,


Tom

___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Angus Salkeld

On 14/11/13 11:46 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2013-11-14 05:12:55 -0800:

Hi everyone,

I think that we have recently reached critical mass for the
openstack-dev mailing-list, with 2267 messages posted in October, and
November well on its way to pass 2000 again. Some of those are just
off-topic (and I've been regularly fighting against them) but most of
them are just about us covering an ever-increasing scope, stretching the
definition of what we include in openstack development.

Therefore I'd like to propose a split between two lists:

*openstack-dev*: Discussions on future development for OpenStack
official projects

*stackforge-dev*: Discussions on development for stackforge-hosted projects

Non-official OpenStack-related projects would get discussed in
stackforge-dev (or any other list of their preference), while
openstack-dev would be focused on openstack official programs (including
incubated  integrated projects).

That means discussion about Solum, Mistral, Congress or Murano
(stackforge/* repos in gerrit) would now live on stackforge-dev.
Discussions about Glance, TripleO or Oslo libraries (openstack*/* repos
on gerrit) would happen on openstack-dev. This will allow easier
filtering and prioritization; OpenStack developers interested in
tracking promising stackforge projects would subscribe to both lists.

That will not solve all issues. We should also collectively make sure
that *usage questions are re-routed* to the openstack general
mailing-list, where they belong. Too many people still answer off-topic
questions here on openstack-dev, which encourages people to be off-topic
in the future (traffic on the openstack general ML has been mostly
stable, with only 868 posts in October). With those actions, I hope that
traffic on openstack-dev would drop back to the 1000-1500 range, which
would be more manageable for everyone.



Allow me an analogy if you will:

Consider a burgeoning city. There are people who have been around a long
time. Some are politicians, some work for the city, some are just good
citizens. These people see newcomers in the commons and greet them with
open arms. Those who have only been around a while see those and see that
this is a city where new people are welcome, and they do the same as the
old timers, welcoming new residents and visitors alike, and they also
feel even more welcome than before they noticed that. Though newcomers
must wait a while and gain the trust of the old-timers to call themselves
citizens, they are already encouraged to participate in discussions at
every level and to organize themselves in the same way as the old-timers.

Now consider a different city. Things are quiet in the commons. Newcomers
are greeted with a sign. Newcomers over there-. That part of town is
unknown to the rest of the world. It has less infrastructure. It also
has very little representation in the government. The line is very clear
between the citizens and the newcomers. When the newcomers want to become
full citizens, they have to go before a council of old-timers, some of
whom have specifically decided to ignore newcomers until this moment.

Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.


I completely agree with this, lets stick to one list.

-Angus



___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Re: [openstack-dev] Split of the openstack-dev list

2013-11-14 Thread Renat Akhmerov
On 15 Nov 2013, at 02:46, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:

 Allow me an analogy if you will:
 
 Consider a burgeoning city. There are people who have been around a long
 time. Some are politicians, some work for the city, some are just good
 citizens. These people see newcomers in the commons and greet them with
 open arms. Those who have only been around a while see those and see that
 this is a city where new people are welcome, and they do the same as the
 old timers, welcoming new residents and visitors alike, and they also
 feel even more welcome than before they noticed that. Though newcomers
 must wait a while and gain the trust of the old-timers to call themselves
 citizens, they are already encouraged to participate in discussions at
 every level and to organize themselves in the same way as the old-timers.
 
 Now consider a different city. Things are quiet in the commons. Newcomers
 are greeted with a sign. Newcomers over there-. That part of town is
 unknown to the rest of the world. It has less infrastructure. It also
 has very little representation in the government. The line is very clear
 between the citizens and the newcomers. When the newcomers want to become
 full citizens, they have to go before a council of old-timers, some of
 whom have specifically decided to ignore newcomers until this moment.
 
 Now, choose which city will grow faster and produce more innovation.

This is great! Totally agree.___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev