I'm -1 on GitHub discussions. If anything the user can just file a GitHub issue for the same purpose, if they prefer the GitHub interface over emails. In theory, GHDiscussions can be better for very active topics, but honestly I don't think we have that sort of throughput.
Having payed attention to a few uses of the Go Programming Language use of GitHub features, i found the Discussions lead to *more* repetitive threads and points, since folks are emboldened to not pay attention outside of their local thread in the discussion. I can't see much of a meaningful difference between them and using the Apache Slack instance, which can also have threaded micro discussions. On Thu, Jul 6, 2023, 11:07 AM Robert Bradshaw via dev <dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: > I'm also -1 on introducing another forum, and concur with Alexey that > mailing lists are a (required) deep part of the culture for apache > projects. > > If there's something qualitatively and significantly different about > discussions that makes it a better fit, I would consider it. (E.g. IMHO the > structure/format of stack overflow lends itself much better to scalable > user support than a mailing list, which is why it makes sense to be there.) > The statement about "folks to get[ting] unblocked on small/medium > implementation blocker" is important, and we should definitely encourage > people to more actively use the existing lists for this purpose rather than > having out-of-band discussions when possible which will be helpful to the > larger community. (Not seeing how this is unique to GH Discussions though.) > > (I'm also skeptical of "GH Discussions is more discoverable and > approachable for new users and contributors." I definitely think it makes > sense to meet users where they are, but while I know many developers that > don't actively use github (some don't even have an account), I don't > (personally) don't know any that don't have an email address which is a > good lower common denominator. But maybe that just dates me...) > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 7:22 AM Jack McCluskey via dev <dev@beam.apache.org> > wrote: > >> Also going to be -1 on this one, I'm not sure we pick anything up from >> adding a forum apart from adding another place that needs to be checked. >> >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 4:03 AM Jan Lukavský <je...@seznam.cz> wrote: >> >>> -1 >>> >>> Totally agree with Byron and Alexey. >>> >>> Jan >>> On 7/3/23 21:18, Byron Ellis via dev wrote: >>> >>> -1. This just leads to needless fragmentation not to mention being at >>> the mercy of a specific technology provider. >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 11:39 AM XQ Hu via dev <dev@beam.apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 with GH discussion. >>>> If Airflow can do this https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions, >>>> I think we can do this as well. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 9:51 AM Alexey Romanenko < >>>> aromanenko....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> -1 >>>>> I understand that for some people, who maybe are not very familiar >>>>> with ASF and its “Apache Way” [1], it may sound a bit obsolete but mailing >>>>> lists are one of the key things of every ASF project which Apache Beam is. >>>>> Having user@, dev@ and commits@ lists are required for ASF project to >>>>> maintain the open discussions that are publicly accessible and archived in >>>>> the same way for all ASF projects. >>>>> >>>>> I just wanted to remind a key motto at Apache Software Foundation is: >>>>> *“If it didn't happen on the mailing list, it didn't happen.”* >>>>> >>>>> — >>>>> Alexey >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://apache.org/theapacheway/index.html >>>>> >>>>> On 1 Jul 2023, at 19:54, Anand Inguva via dev <dev@beam.apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +1 for GitHub discussions as well. But I am also little concerned >>>>> about multiple places for discussions. As Danny said, if we have a good >>>>> plan on how to move forward on how/when to archive the current mailing >>>>> list, that would be great. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Anand >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jul 1, 2023, 3:21 AM Damon Douglas <douglas.da...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm very strong +1 for replacing the use of Email with GitHub >>>>>> Discussions. Thank you for bringing this up. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 7:38 AM Danny McCormick via dev < >>>>>> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for starting this discussion! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm a weak -1 for this proposal. While I think that GH Discussions >>>>>>> can be a good forum, I think most of the things that Discussions do are >>>>>>> covered by some combination of the dev/user lists and GitHub issues, and >>>>>>> the net outcome of this will be creating one more forum to pay attention >>>>>>> to. I know in the past we've had a hard time keeping up with Stack >>>>>>> overflow >>>>>>> questions for a similar reason. With that said, I'm not opposed to >>>>>>> trying >>>>>>> it out and experimenting as long as we have (a) clear criteria for >>>>>>> understanding if the change is effective or not (can be subjective), >>>>>>> (b) a >>>>>>> clear idea of when we'd revisit the discussion, and (c) a clear path to >>>>>>> rollback the decision without it being *too *much work (this might >>>>>>> mean something like disabling future discussions and keeping the >>>>>>> history or >>>>>>> somehow moving the history to the dev or user list). If we do this, I >>>>>>> also >>>>>>> think we should update https://beam.apache.org/community/contact-us/ >>>>>>> with a clear taxonomy of what goes where (this is what I'm unsure of >>>>>>> today). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> FWIW, if we were proposing cutting either the user list or both the >>>>>>> user and dev list in favor of discussions, I would be +1. I do think the >>>>>>> advantages of discussions over email are real (threaded, easy to convert >>>>>>> to/from issues, markdown, one place for all things Beam). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Danny >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:23 AM Svetak Sundhar via dev < >>>>>>> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I wanted to start a discussion to gauge interest on enabling Github >>>>>>>> Discussions <https://docs.github.com/en/discussions/quickstart> in >>>>>>>> Apache Beam. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>> + GH Discussions allows for folks to get unblocked on small/medium >>>>>>>> implementation blocker (Google employees can often get this help by >>>>>>>> scheduling a call with teammates whereas there is a larger barrier for >>>>>>>> non-Google employees to get this help). >>>>>>>> + On the above point, more visibility into the development blockers >>>>>>>> that others have previously faced. >>>>>>>> + GH Discussions is more discoverable and approachable for new >>>>>>>> users and contributors. >>>>>>>> + A centralized place to have discussions. Long term, it makes >>>>>>>> sense to eventually fully migrate to GH Discussions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>> - For a period of time when we use both the dev list and GH >>>>>>>> Discussions, context can be confusing. >>>>>>>> - Anything else? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To be clear, I’m not advocating that we move off the dev list >>>>>>>> immediately. I propose that over time we slowly start moving >>>>>>>> discussions >>>>>>>> over to GH discussions, utilizing things such as the poll feature. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am aware that the Airflow project [1] uses both GH Discussions >>>>>>>> today and a dev@ list [2] today. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions >>>>>>>> [2] https://lists.apache.org/list.html?d...@airflow.apache.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Svetak Sundhar >>>>>>>> Data Engineer >>>>>>>> s <nellywil...@google.com>vetaksund...@google.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>
