I made a mistake assuming lazy consensus.. .I did not intend to cheat
the process or anything.

I don't want to talk too much about the process here to not diverge
the discussion, as I will be more careful in the future. Don't worry
about that part.


I don't have a strong feeling to what list we're moving. I thought
moving to its own list would clear any doubts and I suggested a new
list for that.


If issues satisfy everybody lets go with [email protected]

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:46 AM Robbie Gemmell
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Can you elaborate on why you think the mails are better related to
> commits@ but not issues@?
>
> For me, they arent commits, but are issue-related given they tend to
> be disucssion of the underlying problem or discussing improvements to
> the changes addressing it. Similar to what most JIRA comments used to
> be before the PRs. The PR will also typically have a JIRA associated
> which comments get mirrored into as worklog, so they seem quite
> related. Once all that discussion happens, a change may or may nto get
> pushed, at which point it ends up with a mail on commits@.
>
> Robbie
>
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 15:06, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> >
> > I would prefer either commits or its own list, those github comments
> > are not always related to JIRA.
> >
> > I would go with [email protected]
> >
> >
> > @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 <[email protected]> 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 
> > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> If you prefer issues@. I’m fine with that.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 8:29 AM Clebert Suconic 
> > > >> <[email protected]>
> > > >> 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 
> > > >>> <[email protected]>
> > > >>> 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 [email protected]?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Robbie
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 12:44, Robbie Gemmell 
> > > >>>> <[email protected]>
> > > >>>> 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 <
> > > >>>> [email protected]> 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 <
> > > >>>> [email protected]> 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 <
> > > >>>> [email protected]> 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
> > > >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> 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 <
> > > >>>> [email protected]> 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 <
> > > >>>> [email protected]> Date: 15/02/2019  22:39  (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > >>>> [email protected] 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >> 
> > > >>>> wrote:>>
> > > >>>>> People are probably missing this discussion because of that noise.> 
> > > >>>>> >> >
> > > >>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:47 AM Otavio Piske <[email protected]>
> > > >>>> 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 <> > >
> > > >>>> [email protected]>> > > 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



-- 
Clebert Suconic

Reply via email to