[Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
46 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here
suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people to
filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.

But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.

I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there is too
much traffic.

Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub comments to a
separate list.


We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.  Such
as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually even
codes but without the clutter of github.
--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

Otavio Piske
Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute more
often: I think that it be good.

I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox. It
requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions
about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here
> suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people to
> filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.
>
> But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.
>
> I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there is too
> much traffic.
>
> Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub comments to a
> separate list.
>
>
> We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.  Such
> as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually even
> codes but without the clutter of github.
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>


--
Kind regards
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute more
> often: I think that it be good.
>
> I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox. It
> requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions
> about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <
> [hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here
> > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people to
> > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.
> >
> > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.
> >
> > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there is
> too
> > much traffic.
> >
> > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub comments
> to a
> > separate list.
> >
> >
> > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.
> Such
> > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually even
> > codes but without the clutter of github.
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
> >
>
>
> --
> Kind regards
>
--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

christopher.l.shannon
I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to
do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.

There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it
manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that
GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a
different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have
something similar.

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute more
> > often: I think that it be good.
> >
> > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox. It
> > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions
> > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <
> > [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here
> > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people to
> > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.
> > >
> > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.
> > >
> > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there is
> > too
> > > much traffic.
> > >
> > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub comments
> > to a
> > > separate list.
> > >
> > >
> > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.
> > Such
> > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually
> even
> > > codes but without the clutter of github.
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kind regards
> >
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

jbonofre
In reply to this post by clebertsuconic
Hi Clebert,

I agree, I think it would be more "readable" to have gitbox mail on
[hidden email] mailing list for instance.

Regards
JB

On 15/02/2019 00:36, Clebert Suconic wrote:

> I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here
> suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people to
> filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.
>
> But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.
>
> I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there is too
> much traffic.
>
> Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub comments to a
> separate list.
>
>
> We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.  Such
> as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually even
> codes but without the clutter of github.
>

--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[hidden email]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
In reply to this post by christopher.l.shannon
The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing this
based on a feedback of someone else.

So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Just
trying to make it easy for new people.

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to
> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.
>
> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it
> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that
> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a
> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have
> something similar.
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]
> >
> wrote:
>
> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute
> more
> > > often: I think that it be good.
> > >
> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.
> It
> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions
> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here
> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people
> to
> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.
> > > >
> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.
> > > >
> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there
> is
> > > too
> > > > much traffic.
> > > >
> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub
> comments
> > > to a
> > > > separate list.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.
> > > Such
> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually
> > even
> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.
> > > > --
> > > > Clebert Suconic
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Kind regards
> > >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
> >
>
--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

michael.andre.pearce
I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

ryeats
In reply to this post by clebertsuconic
As someone who just subscribes to the dev list to stay in the loop on upcoming changes or bugs, I had to recently add a filter to trash all of the messages coming from GitHub because it was way too much. I would still be interested in seeing what PR's are opened but the noise from getting emailed for every comment on every PR was too much if I wanted that I would have watched the project directly in github.

Ryan

On 2/15/19, 3:48 PM, "Clebert Suconic" <[hidden email]> wrote:

    The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing this
    based on a feedback of someone else.
   
    So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Just
    trying to make it easy for new people.
   
    On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <
    [hidden email]> wrote:
   
    > I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to
    > do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.
    >
    > There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it
    > manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that
    > GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a
    > different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have
    > something similar.
    >
    > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]
    > >
    > wrote:
    >
    > > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.
    > >
    > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute
    > more
    > > > often: I think that it be good.
    > > >
    > > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.
    > It
    > > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions
    > > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.
    > > >
    > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <
    > > > [hidden email]>
    > > > wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here
    > > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people
    > to
    > > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.
    > > > >
    > > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.
    > > > >
    > > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there
    > is
    > > > too
    > > > > much traffic.
    > > > >
    > > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub
    > comments
    > > > to a
    > > > > separate list.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.
    > > > Such
    > > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually
    > > even
    > > > > codes but without the clutter of github.
    > > > > --
    > > > > Clebert Suconic
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Kind regards
    > > >
    > > --
    > > Clebert Suconic
    > >
    >
    --
    Clebert Suconic
   

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
In reply to this post by clebertsuconic
Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.

I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining in.  Like
Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just joining)

What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to  a new
list.

I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.

If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.

On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid
> me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to
> one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
> [hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To:
> [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages
> on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a
> way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting
> myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it
> easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <
> [hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either
> way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either
> addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now
> obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my
> gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label
> and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine
> most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at
> 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People
> are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri,
> Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > >
> Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more>
> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github
> messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant
> cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects
> that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb
> 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> >
> > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had
> some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided
> to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >>
> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >>
> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there>
> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to
> follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate
> list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and
> important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural
> decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the
> clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > >
> --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic

--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
messages to the commit message.


On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
>
> I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just joining)
>
> What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to  a new list.
>
> I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
>
> If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic



--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17877

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:00 AM Clebert Suconic
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
> messages to the commit message.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
> >
> > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just joining)
> >
> > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to  a new list.
> >
> > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
> >
> > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic



--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

Robbie Gemmell
In reply to this post by clebertsuconic
Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear period
to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days, but
discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion suggests
otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really properly
discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was the
terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.

I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on PRs
belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the JIRA
traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say that
makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
list.

If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we should
actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra to
hold off moving things while we do so.

I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine where
they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same applies in
reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into the
same place they were going originally.

Robbie

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
> messages to the commit message.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
> >
> > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just joining)
> >
> > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to  a new list.
> >
> > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
> >
> > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)

I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear period
> to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
> This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days, but
> discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
> discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion suggests
> otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
> details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really properly
> discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was the
> terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
> mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
>
> I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on PRs
> belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the JIRA
> traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say that
> makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
> list.
>
> If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we should
> actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra to
> hold off moving things while we do so.
>
> I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine where
> they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same applies in
> reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into the
> same place they were going originally.
>
> Robbie
>
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
> > messages to the commit message.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
> > >
> > > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just joining)
> > >
> > > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to  a new list.
> > >
> > > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
> > >
> > > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
> > >
> > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic



--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

Robbie Gemmell
I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?

Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.

If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
things to use it.

Robbie

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
> name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
>
> I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear period
> > to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
> > This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days, but
> > discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
> > discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion suggests
> > otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
> > details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really properly
> > discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was the
> > terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
> > mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
> >
> > I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on PRs
> > belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the JIRA
> > traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say that
> > makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
> > list.
> >
> > If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we should
> > actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra to
> > hold off moving things while we do so.
> >
> > I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine where
> > they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same applies in
> > reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into the
> > same place they were going originally.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
> > > messages to the commit message.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
> > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
> > > >
> > > > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just joining)
> > > >
> > > > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to  a new list.
> > > >
> > > > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
> > > >
> > > > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > > >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

Robbie Gemmell
Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest
specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested
email address of [hidden email]?

Robbie

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
> fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
> JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
> by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?
>
> Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
> like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.
>
> If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
> good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
> statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
> things to use it.
>
> Robbie
>
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
> > name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
> >
> > I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear period
> > > to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
> > > This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days, but
> > > discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
> > > discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion suggests
> > > otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
> > > details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really properly
> > > discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was the
> > > terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
> > > mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
> > >
> > > I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on PRs
> > > belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the JIRA
> > > traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say that
> > > makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
> > > list.
> > >
> > > If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we should
> > > actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra to
> > > hold off moving things while we do so.
> > >
> > > I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine where
> > > they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same applies in
> > > reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into the
> > > same place they were going originally.
> > >
> > > Robbie
> > >
> > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
> > > > messages to the commit message.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
> > > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
> > > > >
> > > > > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just joining)
> > > > >
> > > > > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to  a new list.
> > > > >
> > > > > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
> > > > >
> > > > > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > > > >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Clebert Suconic
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
This is a simple task.  I did not think it would be a big deal. Those
gitbox messages on the list are noise. (Everyone just filters them out). I
don’t see a point in keeping them on dev list. I can filter them out. But
that doesn’t make it easy on non committees looking at our list.

I updated the JiRA accordingly.  I think the name is sensible enough.

If you ok with everything we can move ahead. On that case update the JIRA.
If not please let Me know.

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 7:54 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest
> specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested
> email address of [hidden email]?
>
> Robbie
>
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
> > fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
> > JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
> > by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?
> >
> > Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
> > like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.
> >
> > If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
> > good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
> > statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
> > things to use it.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
> > > name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
> > >
> > > I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear
> period
> > > > to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
> > > > This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days, but
> > > > discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
> > > > discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion
> suggests
> > > > otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
> > > > details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really properly
> > > > discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was the
> > > > terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
> > > > mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
> > > >
> > > > I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on PRs
> > > > belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the
> JIRA
> > > > traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say that
> > > > makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
> > > > list.
> > > >
> > > > If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we
> should
> > > > actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra to
> > > > hold off moving things while we do so.
> > > >
> > > > I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine where
> > > > they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same applies
> in
> > > > reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into
> the
> > > > same place they were going originally.
> > > >
> > > > Robbie
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
> > > > > messages to the commit message.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
> > > > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining
> in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just
> joining)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages to
> a new list.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate,
> and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will
> all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> > > > > >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
> [hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To:
> [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages
> on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a
> way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting
> myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it
> easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <
> [hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either
> way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either
> addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now
> obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my
> gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label
> and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine
> most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at
> 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People
> are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri,
> Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > >
> Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more>
> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github
> messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant
> cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects
> that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb
> 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>> >
> > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had
> some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided
> to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >>
> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >>
> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there>
> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to
> follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate
> list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and
> important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural
> decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the
> clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > >
> --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
>
--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
If you prefer issues@. I’m fine with that.

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:29 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> This is a simple task.  I did not think it would be a big deal. Those
> gitbox messages on the list are noise. (Everyone just filters them out). I
> don’t see a point in keeping them on dev list. I can filter them out. But
> that doesn’t make it easy on non committees looking at our list.
>
> I updated the JiRA accordingly.  I think the name is sensible enough.
>
> If you ok with everything we can move ahead. On that case update the
> JIRA.  If not please let Me know.
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 7:54 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest
>> specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested
>> email address of [hidden email]?
>>
>> Robbie
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
>> > fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
>> > JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
>> > by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?
>> >
>> > Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
>> > like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.
>> >
>> > If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
>> > good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
>> > statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
>> > things to use it.
>> >
>> > Robbie
>> >
>> > On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
>> > > name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
>> > >
>> > > I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear
>> period
>> > > > to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
>> > > > This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days, but
>> > > > discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
>> > > > discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion
>> suggests
>> > > > otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
>> > > > details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really properly
>> > > > discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was
>> the
>> > > > terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
>> > > > mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on PRs
>> > > > belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the
>> JIRA
>> > > > traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say
>> that
>> > > > makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
>> > > > list.
>> > > >
>> > > > If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we
>> should
>> > > > actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra
>> to
>> > > > hold off moving things while we do so.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine
>> where
>> > > > they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same applies
>> in
>> > > > reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into
>> the
>> > > > same place they were going originally.
>> > > >
>> > > > Robbie
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
>> > > > > messages to the commit message.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
>> > > > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I just think this could be more friendly for new people joining
>> in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone just
>> joining)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages
>> to  a new list.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than adequate,
>> and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions, it will
>> all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
>> > > > > >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
>> [hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To:
>> [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github messages
>> on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.  So in a
>> way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am putting
>> myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to make it
>> easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher Shannon <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this because either
>> way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters on either
>> addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic right now
>> obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels setup on my
>> gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with one label
>> and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.  I imagine
>> most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at
>> 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>> > People
>> are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> > On Fri,
>> Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]> wrote:> >> > >
>> Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to contribute> more>
>> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think that the Github
>> messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > > requires constant
>> cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> > > about subjects
>> that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >> > > On Fri, Feb
>> 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > > [hidden email]>>
>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev list on my daily basis.  We had
>> some members here> > > > suggesting doing this in the past and we decided
>> to let just people> to> > > > filter out stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >>
>> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to recruit new open source  devs.> > > >>
>> > > > I just heard from a guy who only subscribed users list because there>
>> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to
>> follow.  So I propose we move GitHub> comments> > > to a> > > > separate
>> list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could leave this list for more generic and
>> important discussions.> > > Such> > > > as the web site. Architectural
>> decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> > even> > > > codes but without the
>> clutter of github.> > > > --> > > > Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > >
>> --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> > Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Clebert Suconic
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > Clebert Suconic
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Clebert Suconic
>>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>
--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
Robbie.  I sent this message on feb-14.  JB suggested commit list and I
agreed with him.  So I assumed consensus.


If you like another list please let me know the name and make a post on the
Jira so this moves on.

Thanks.


On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:37 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> If you prefer issues@. I’m fine with that.
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:29 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> This is a simple task.  I did not think it would be a big deal. Those
>> gitbox messages on the list are noise. (Everyone just filters them out). I
>> don’t see a point in keeping them on dev list. I can filter them out. But
>> that doesn’t make it easy on non committees looking at our list.
>>
>> I updated the JiRA accordingly.  I think the name is sensible enough.
>>
>> If you ok with everything we can move ahead. On that case update the
>> JIRA.  If not please let Me know.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 7:54 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest
>>> specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested
>>> email address of [hidden email]?
>>>
>>> Robbie
>>>
>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
>>> > fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
>>> > JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
>>> > by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?
>>> >
>>> > Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
>>> > like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.
>>> >
>>> > If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
>>> > good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
>>> > statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
>>> > things to use it.
>>> >
>>> > Robbie
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
>>> > > name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
>>> > >
>>> > > I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
>>> > >
>>> > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear
>>> period
>>> > > > to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
>>> > > > This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days,
>>> but
>>> > > > discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
>>> > > > discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion
>>> suggests
>>> > > > otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
>>> > > > details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really
>>> properly
>>> > > > discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was
>>> the
>>> > > > terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
>>> > > > mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on
>>> PRs
>>> > > > belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the
>>> JIRA
>>> > > > traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say
>>> that
>>> > > > makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
>>> > > > list.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we
>>> should
>>> > > > actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra
>>> to
>>> > > > hold off moving things while we do so.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine
>>> where
>>> > > > they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same
>>> applies in
>>> > > > reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into
>>> the
>>> > > > same place they were going originally.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Robbie
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
>>> > > > > messages to the commit message.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
>>> > > > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > I just think this could be more friendly for new people
>>> joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone
>>> just joining)
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages
>>> to  a new list.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > > > > >>
>>> > > > > >> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than
>>> adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions,
>>> it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy
>>> smartphone.
>>> > > > > >> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
>>> [hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To:
>>> [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github
>>> messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.
>>> So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am
>>> putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to
>>> make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher
>>> Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this
>>> because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters
>>> on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic
>>> right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels
>>> setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with
>>> one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.
>>> I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15,
>>> 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>>
>>> > People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> >
>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to
>>> contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think
>>> that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > >
>>> requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> >
>>> > about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >>
>>> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > >
>>> [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev
>>> list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing
>>> this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out
>>> stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to
>>> recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who
>>> only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.>
>>> > > >> > > > Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub>
>>> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could
>>> leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > >
>>> > as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> >
>>> even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > >
>>> Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> >
>>> Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > Clebert Suconic
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > Clebert Suconic
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > Clebert Suconic
>>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>
--
Clebert Suconic
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

tabish121@gmail.com
On 2/21/19 9:13 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> Robbie.  I sent this message on feb-14.  JB suggested commit list and I
> agreed with him.  So I assumed consensus.
>
>
> If you like another list please let me know the name and make a post on the
> Jira so this moves on.
>
> Thanks.

I'd go with issues@ to keep them on the same list as the JIRA mails if
we have to move them at all but as others I'm +0 on the need to move
since mail filters work just fine.


>
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:37 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> If you prefer issues@. I’m fine with that.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:29 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This is a simple task.  I did not think it would be a big deal. Those
>>> gitbox messages on the list are noise. (Everyone just filters them out). I
>>> don’t see a point in keeping them on dev list. I can filter them out. But
>>> that doesn’t make it easy on non committees looking at our list.
>>>
>>> I updated the JiRA accordingly.  I think the name is sensible enough.
>>>
>>> If you ok with everything we can move ahead. On that case update the
>>> JIRA.  If not please let Me know.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 7:54 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest
>>>> specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested
>>>> email address of [hidden email]?
>>>>
>>>> Robbie
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
>>>>> fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
>>>>> JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
>>>>> by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
>>>>> like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.
>>>>>
>>>>> If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
>>>>> good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
>>>>> statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
>>>>> things to use it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <
>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
>>>>>> name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear
>>>> period
>>>>>>> to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
>>>>>>> This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days,
>>>> but
>>>>>>> discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
>>>>>>> discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion
>>>> suggests
>>>>>>> otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
>>>>>>> details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really
>>>> properly
>>>>>>> discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was
>>>> the
>>>>>>> terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
>>>>>>> mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on
>>>> PRs
>>>>>>> belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the
>>>> JIRA
>>>>>>> traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say
>>>> that
>>>>>>> makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
>>>>>>> list.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we
>>>> should
>>>>>>> actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra
>>>> to
>>>>>>> hold off moving things while we do so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine
>>>> where
>>>>>>> they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same
>>>> applies in
>>>>>>> reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into
>>>> the
>>>>>>> same place they were going originally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <
>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
>>>>>>>> messages to the commit message.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just think this could be more friendly for new people
>>>> joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone
>>>> just joining)
>>>>>>>>> What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages
>>>> to  a new list.
>>>>>>>>> I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <
>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than
>>>> adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions,
>>>> it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy
>>>> smartphone.
>>>>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
>>>> [hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To:
>>>> [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github
>>>> messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.
>>>> So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am
>>>> putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to
>>>> make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher
>>>> Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this
>>>> because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters
>>>> on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic
>>>> right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels
>>>> setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with
>>>> one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.
>>>> I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15,
>>>> 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>>
>>>>> People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> >
>>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to
>>>> contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think
>>>> that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > >
>>>> requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> >
>>>>> about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >>
>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > >
>>>> [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev
>>>> list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing
>>>> this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out
>>>> stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to
>>>> recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who
>>>> only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.>
>>>>>>>>>>> Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub>
>>>> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could
>>>> leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > >
>>>>> as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> >
>>>> even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > >
>>>> Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> >
>>>> Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>> --
>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>>

--
Tim Bish

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discuss] automated github messages on a separate list

clebertsuconic
I would prefer either commits or its own list, those github comments
are not always related to JIRA.

I would go with [hidden email]


@Tim Bish I understand you +0 on this. as I said I can myself deal
with filters.. but the target of such changes is for users and other
non committers looking at the dev list. The noise doesn't make it
easy. (Those gitbox messages are just noise, that i have to filter
out.. so they are useless anyway). Devs who like them will be able to
subscribe the appropriate list.

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 9:37 AM Timothy Bish <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 2/21/19 9:13 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> > Robbie.  I sent this message on feb-14.  JB suggested commit list and I
> > agreed with him.  So I assumed consensus.
> >
> >
> > If you like another list please let me know the name and make a post on the
> > Jira so this moves on.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> I'd go with issues@ to keep them on the same list as the JIRA mails if
> we have to move them at all but as others I'm +0 on the need to move
> since mail filters work just fine.
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:37 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> If you prefer issues@. I’m fine with that.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:29 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> This is a simple task.  I did not think it would be a big deal. Those
> >>> gitbox messages on the list are noise. (Everyone just filters them out). I
> >>> don’t see a point in keeping them on dev list. I can filter them out. But
> >>> that doesn’t make it easy on non committees looking at our list.
> >>>
> >>> I updated the JiRA accordingly.  I think the name is sensible enough.
> >>>
> >>> If you ok with everything we can move ahead. On that case update the
> >>> JIRA.  If not please let Me know.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 7:54 AM Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hah, I actually overlooked that you updated the JIRA to suggest
> >>>> specifically "activemq-gitbox". I'm assuming that means a suggested
> >>>> email address of [hidden email]?
> >>>>
> >>>> Robbie
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell <[hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> I think we should stop asking infra to do things before they have been
> >>>>> fully set out/agreed. If I was infra then now you have updated the
> >>>>> JIRA my next question would be: what is this new list called? Followed
> >>>>> by, why didnt we create it already using https://selfserve.apache.org?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Personally, I would just re-use "issues@" given PR comments do seem
> >>>>> like issues traffic, and I think we have enough lists.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If enough folks think we should use a new list though, it would be
> >>>>> good to agree a name (which could be done via a simple lazy consensus
> >>>>> statement), then we can create it, and then we can ask infra to update
> >>>>> things to use it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Robbie
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:03, Clebert Suconic <
> >>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>> Lazy consensus was for the overal move. I didn't think on the list
> >>>>>> name (I thought it was ok on just moving it there)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I will change the JIRA to be on its own list.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> >>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Invoking Lazy Consensus normally involves giving people a clear
> >>>> period
> >>>>>>> to agree/disagree with your intended action before you initiate it.
> >>>>>>> This mail thread had obviously been around for a number of days,
> >>>> but
> >>>>>>> discussing 'should we do this?' isn't quite the same thing as
> >>>>>>> discussing 'I'm doing this tomorrow unless further discussion
> >>>> suggests
> >>>>>>> otherwise'. You shouldnt have to 'assume consensus'. Some of the
> >>>>>>> details weren't at all concrete, in particular noone really
> >>>> properly
> >>>>>>> discussed the destination list: 'new list' or 'separate list' was
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>> terminology you used throughout the thread and commits@ was only
> >>>>>>> mentioned as a 'for instance' by JB once mid-thread.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm -1 on using "commits@" personally, I dont think comments on
> >>>> PRs
> >>>>>>> belong on that list. There is also an "issues@" already where the
> >>>> JIRA
> >>>>>>> traffic was moved previously and between those two lists I'd say
> >>>> that
> >>>>>>> makes a far better destination, if it isn't to be a completely new
> >>>>>>> list.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If folks mostly think using commits@ is great, so be it, but we
> >>>> should
> >>>>>>> actually discuss that. I have posted on the JIRA to ask that Infra
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>> hold off moving things while we do so.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm -0 on the overall move as I too think the messages are fine
> >>>> where
> >>>>>>> they are and are easily filterable, but I do admit the same
> >>>> applies in
> >>>>>>> reverse; if we move them I'll typically just filter them back into
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>> same place they were going originally.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Robbie
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 16:01, Clebert Suconic <
> >>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I'm assuming consensus and I'm asking infra to move the gitbox
> >>>>>>>> messages to the commit message.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:44 AM Clebert Suconic
> >>>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Don’t get me wrong.  I can do with filters  personally.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I just think this could be more friendly for new people
> >>>> joining in.  Like Ryan yeats who just posted his opinion (as if someone
> >>>> just joining)
> >>>>>>>>> What about this.  We could ask Infra to move GitHub messages
> >>>> to  a new list.
> >>>>>>>>> I already follow GitHub messages on my email directly anyways.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If people want those they can subscribe to the new list.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 9:21 AM michael.andre.pearce <
> >>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I am also +0 on this. I find email filters more than
> >>>> adequate, and avoid me having to maintain several mail group subscriptions,
> >>>> it will all come to one mailbox anyhow.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy
> >>>> smartphone.
> >>>>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
> >>>> [hidden email]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To:
> >>>> [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Discuss] automated github
> >>>> messages on a separate list The thing is.  I can do fine with filtering.
> >>>> So in a way I’m doing thisbased on a feedback of someone else.So I am
> >>>> putting myself in the shoes of someone  coming on board now. Justtrying to
> >>>> make it easy for new people.On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 6:58 AM Christopher
> >>>> Shannon <[hidden email]> wrote:> I am +0 on this
> >>>> because either way is fine with me as it's really easy to> do mail filters
> >>>> on either addresses or on subject tags.>> There is a ton of Github traffic
> >>>> right now obviously so to make it> manageable I have filters and labels
> >>>> setup on my gmail account so that> GitHub related messages get tagged with
> >>>> one label and everything else is a> different one which solves the issue.
> >>>> I imagine most email providers have> something similar.>> On Fri, Feb 15,
> >>>> 2019 at 3:20 AM Clebert Suconic <[hidden email]> >> wrote:>>
> >>>>> People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> >> >
> >>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:> >> > > Sharing my perspective as someone who also would like to
> >>>> contribute> more> > > often: I think that it be good.> > >> > > I think
> >>>> that the Github messages create a lot of noise in the mailbox.> It> > >
> >>>> requires constant cleaning/filtering and it is easy to miss discussions> >
> >>>>> about subjects that interest me and for which I would like to help.> > >>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43 AM Clebert Suconic <> > >
> >>>> [hidden email]>> > > wrote:> > >> > > > I work on this dev
> >>>> list on my daily basis.  We had some members here> > > > suggesting doing
> >>>> this in the past and we decided to let just people> to> > > > filter out
> >>>> stuff with filters.   Etc.> > > >> > > > But this doesn’t make easy to
> >>>> recruit new open source  devs.> > > >> > > > I just heard from a guy who
> >>>> only subscribed users list because there> is> > > too> > > > much traffic.>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Github is easy enough to follow.  So I propose we move GitHub>
> >>>> comments> > > to a> > > > separate list.> > > >> > > >> > > > We could
> >>>> leave this list for more generic and important discussions.> > > Such> > >
> >>>>> as the web site. Architectural decisions.  Releases.  And eventually> >
> >>>> even> > > > codes but without the clutter of github.> > > > --> > > >
> >>>> Clebert Suconic> > > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > Kind regards> > >> > --> >
> >>>> Clebert Suconic> >>-- Clebert Suconic
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> >>> --
> >>> Clebert Suconic
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Clebert Suconic
> >>
>
> --
> Tim Bish
>


--
Clebert Suconic
123