Ya I am thinking on the same thing. I want to avoid the side effect of having "dev" list flooded with "user/troubleshoot" messages.
Regards, Kaxil On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, 17:20 Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > I love the idea! > > How about we just mirror our dev@ and user@ to two separate channels: dev > = > #development , user = #troubleshooting (or we can have new channels for > that or change names of the channels to official-dev, official-user etc.). > > From what I saw in the message @mahout - with bi-directional > synchronisation, the email threads are automatically converted to email > threads and vice-versa. We could still use other channels for ad-hoc > discussions (but with the nice twist that we could easily refer to the > threads/discussion in the devlist/#dev users/#troubleshooting from within > slack. > > This will likely increase traffic in mailing list for both channels, but if > we are going to have the same on slack/mailing list, it will be much more > transparent and much more convenient to follow if both slack and email for. > > J. > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:50 AM Kaxil Naik <[email protected]> wrote: > > > One 1 concern I have with forwarding everything to Dev would the "how-to" > > question. > > > > For example: how I can integrate LDAP with Airflow? Or How can enable > RBAC > > UI etc. > > > > Forwarding those to "users" might make more sense I feel but I am very > open > > to suggestions and discussions. > > > > Regards, > > Kaxil > > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, 15:10 Tomasz Urbaszek <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Thanks Kaxil for starting new this thread! > > > > > > In my opinion, we should use dev@ for this integration. I am afraid > that > > > using slack@ with selective forwarding in a bidirectional way will be > > > hard to achieve. > > > > > > In my opinion, the most important aspect of this integration is to > bring > > > devlist discussion to a wider audience (devlist -> slack). If someone > > wants > > > to take part in the discussion then he/she can use mail or slack. > > > > > > One point I am still wondering is, does this integration allow Slack > > users > > > to respond to selected threads/messages? > > > > > > Tomek > > > > > > On 2020/01/27 09:30:26, Kaxil Naik <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hey all, > > > > > > > > While discussing on how to be more welcoming for the community, Tomek > > > found > > > > something really interesting on the devcomm list. > > > > > > > > Tomek's email: > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0192c6932e1bae8300ef50ac9284d7c609bca022bb7edc83ed35bf1d%40%3Cdev.airflow.apache.org%3E > > > > > > > > "We have set up Mahout's slack space to forward directly to > > > > > [email protected]. We will now be able to plan publicly on > > slack. > > > This > > > > > a bi-directional connection, all messages to [email protected] > > > will > > > > > show up in Slack. No one will be left out of planning." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rbc1c1c2a289accb40e7e3967f7c08213f13fea46013f73cf881c74c0%40%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this is a very good find. > > > > > > > > We can do something similar. > > > > 2 things I have in mind: > > > > > > > > 1) A separate list [email protected] where we forward all > Slack > > > > communication > > > > > > > > 2) A selective forward (filter certain channels to different list). > > Some > > > of > > > > them can go to dev@ but some belong to users@ list > > > > > > > > > > > > I see (1) being more relevant. > > > > > > > > I have separated that thread to discuss the specifics of Slack as > this > > > can > > > > be independent of that thread. > > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Kaxil > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jarek Potiuk > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> >
