+0. I manage just fine using filters and also use the dev list to conduct PR discussions. I am not against the idea of using separate lists, if others think it'd be useful.
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > It seems to me that we should then move it... people who need can > still follow up... it would be a nice compromise for everybody... > > Would we be ok to move github comments to the commit list? ( I think > that't the list we should use). > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:45 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> > wrote: > > From the VP Incubator's standpoint (as well as infrequent ActiveMQ > > contributor) > > > > I see a lot of new projects coming on board, starting off with a dev@ > list, > > getting the notifications there. With tools like github, since you're > > getting the notification personally (when it involves you) as well as on > > list, it becomes noise. You have the option to subscribe where you want > to > > on github, and as a result many of those podlings eventually create a > > separate notifications@ or commits@ list that receive the messages. So > > there is actual precedence for creating lists dedicated to those > messages. > > > > It satisfies all of the foundation level requirements (discussions on > list, > > archived) while giving developers clear separation of which lists do > what. > > > > Since Artemis is a subproject, you may even want to entertain creating a > > separate [email protected] list for development discussions > specific > > to Artemis. > > > > John > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:05 PM Clebert Suconic < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> @Daniel: that's a general issue at apache.. not just activemq... just > >> looked now.. it's the same pattern everywhere... > >> > >> > >> It would be nice if we could fix this rule in apache... PRs is a new > >> thing.. and the rules needs to be updated... how/where do we go to > >> have a wider discussion? > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > They are different though… A PR discussion is exactly that… a > >> discussion. If there are things in the PR discussions like code > >> suggestions and back and forth about opinions on how something is done > and > >> such, they SHOULD be on the dev list as they are dev discussions. The > >> commit is more “final”. > >> > > >> > That is also the reason that the “reply-to” field on the commit list > is > >> the dev list. If you reply to a commit, it’s starting a discussion > which > >> goes to the dev list. Thus, if we wanted to completely mimic the > >> commits, it would be that the “Open PR” and “Close PR" emails would go > to a > >> different list, but any discussion/replys would go to the dev list. > I’m > >> not sure that buys much. > >> > > >> > Dan > >> > > >> > > >> >> On Dec 6, 2017, at 5:44 PM, Clebert Suconic < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> You could use the same argument to have committs being fed here... > >> >> it's too noisy! > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Timothy Bish <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >>> -1 > >> >>> > >> >>> Unless PR discussions can exist on the dev list I'm against moving > >> that to > >> >>> another list as that is part of the development process. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On 12/06/2017 05:34 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> in my view... and in my plan... going forward now I plan to make > more > >> >>>> discussions on the dev list.. especially around this Roadmap idea. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> What if: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> - We move github traffic to another list.. (commit perhaps)? > >> >>>> - We can still use github to talk about spot on issues.. such as.. > the > >> >>>> format here sucks... the logic here is not accurate.. etc.. etc... > >> >>>> which this is the kind of noise that's feeding this list like > crazy. > >> >>>> ..... You could use the same argument to bring JIRA comments to > the > >> >>>> dev list.. it would be too noise.. I believe that's been the case > at > >> >>>> some point > >> >>>> > >> >>>> But if there is a meaningful discussion... then we would refer the > >> >>>> dev-list... just like as we do in other places. (JIRA, private > list.. > >> >>>> etc.. etc) > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> That seems a reasonable thing to me. It would help us to be more > >> >>>> active on the dev list.. which is what we need now. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:20 PM, jgenender <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Daniel Kulp wrote > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> I’m -0.5 on moving them. PR’s (and the conversations in them) > are > >> part > >> >>>>>> of > >> >>>>>> the development process and should be on the dev list. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> But the deluge often loses the discussion which is why some > projects > >> have > >> >>>>> commit lists. This is the difference between projects that work > off > >> PRs > >> >>>>> and > >> >>>>> projects whose committers mainly just commit directly to the > >> repository. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Unfortunately as pointed out earlier, the volume of noise created > >> causes > >> >>>>> a > >> >>>>> certain amount of people to lose conversations. Some use Nabble, > >> some > >> >>>>> use > >> >>>>> an email client. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> -- > >> >>>>> Sent from: > >> >>>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Dev-f2368404.html > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> Tim Bish > >> >>> twitter: @tabish121 > >> >>> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/ > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Clebert Suconic > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Daniel Kulp > >> > [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog > >> > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Clebert Suconic > >> > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic >
