Bulk JIRA changes prior to a release tend to swamp the list. Perhaps it would be better to close the issue as the work is done.
Mark On Jan 17, 2015 8:11 AM, "Gilles" <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 16:36:55 +0100, Gilles wrote: > >> On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 15:00:34 +0000, sebb wrote: >> >>> On 17 January 2015 at 14:23, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 16:00:45 -0600, Ole Ersoy wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I agree - we're hung up on a clown from the 90s. It's so much >>>>> simpler click watch on github and get notifications. Also >>>>> stackoverflow has a much broader Java community and having traffic go >>>>> through it could benefit this community. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm afraid that the main problem is not the tool. >>>> >>>> Step 1: an issue is felt as a problem by some people (from the >>>> community or might-be contributors) >>>> Step 2: people (from the community) who don't feel the problem >>>> try to demonstrate that there isn't a problem, thus >>>> dismissing the (argumented) feeling of others >>>> >>>> This can destroy a community, or at least prevent its expansion. >>>> [And the "Commons" project's (with the word "project" as in "an >>>> Apache project") community certainly does not benefit from a >>>> pool of contributors commensurate with its purported goal and >>>> user base.] >>>> >>>> On the practical side, I'm not (yet) against having a single "dev" >>>> list: discussions about design are usually interesting even if >>>> applied to another project's codebase (with the the word "project" >>>> as in "programming project"). >>>> >>>> But lately, the flood of automatic notifications (commits and CI) >>>> has drowned the useful discussions. >>>> >>> >>> commits are already sent to a separate list. >>> >> >> The more stringent problem is getting _all_ the projects' commits! >> >> I have just recently changed Continuum and the Jenkins Math job to use >>> commits as well. >>> >>> What other automatic notifications are still affecting the dev list? >>> >>> Maybe they can be redirected elsewhere. >>> >>> For people who do not contribute to a project (i.e. neither >>>> providing code nor checking it), a commit diff is just noise >>>> because they lack context (not being aquainted with the codebase). >>>> >>> >>> Indeed, which is why it is good that they are sent to a different >>> mailing list. >>> >> >> Good, yes. Enough, no. >> >> >>> The Commons community's implied answer to the stated fact is >>>> that people who feel that way should change their perception of >>>> reality, or go away. >>>> >>>> The respectful answer would be to solve the problem with the >>>> readily available technology of the 1990s: separate MLs for >>>> each project's _notifications_ (with the word "project" as in >>>> "programming project"). >>>> >>> >>> As already previously noted, the PMC are responsible for oversight and >>> so must see all the commits. >>> >> >> No, they _must_ not. Because you cannot enforce the "must". [As noted >> by several people, they use filters...] >> People do what they want, and what they can. >> > > In addition to segregated commit MLs, I think that one _digest_ message > every day, summarizing all the commits (of all projects) of the day might > help a lot: policy would be safe. > > > Gilles > > > The number of people voting for any one release of a given >> (programming) project is proof enough that not everybody checks >> everything. >> Even those who vote "should" review, but not necessarily do so >> extensively (if, for example, what is more important for them is >> that the release happens). >> [To avoid instant flaming, I immediately stress that it is _not_ >> to say that Apache should publish unreviewed code...] >> >> Would it really make enough of a difference to non-PMC members to be >>> worth the additional work (ours and Infra) of setting up individual >>> commit lists? >>> >> >> The result would be worth it; oh, yes! >> >> Unfortunately, I cannot imagine how much work this is going to be, >> as I never delved into commit trigger scripts. >> >> >> Gilles >> >> >>>> Regards, >>>> Gilles >>>> >>>> >>>> Ole >>>>> >>>>> On 01/16/2015 10:21 AM, Ben McCann wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I find the whole I idea of a mailing list very 1990s. I'd much prefer >>>>>> something like Google Groups where I can set my notification >>>>>> preferences >>>>>> easily to send me updates only on certain threads such as threads I've >>>>>> started, which has a nice easily browsable and searchable web >>>>>> interface, >>>>>> and where I do not have to go through a signup process for each new >>>>>> group/list I want to post to. I feel many of the problems folks are >>>>>> talking >>>>>> about here are caused by using a frustrating technology. E.g. it was >>>>>> mentioned that if we split mailing lists that joining every list >>>>>> would be >>>>>> very painful. Perhaps that's because the process of joining just a >>>>>> single >>>>>> list is too difficult. Having to setup filters is also not very >>>>>> user-friendly. How do I make a filter that says only put threads on >>>>>> which >>>>>> I've participated in my inbox? There's probably a way, but it's not as >>>>>> obvious as clicking a single button. And even with filters I still >>>>>> don't >>>>>> want most of this garbage coming to my mail account anyway because it >>>>>> pollutes my search results when I'm looking for something I do care >>>>>> about. >>>>>> I signed up for the dev list just so that I could ask that someone >>>>>> reviews >>>>>> and commits my patch <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BCEL-186> >>>>>> (which >>>>>> I still need help with), but I really have no interest in getting any >>>>>> commons mail beyond that. I've never participated in any of these >>>>>> other >>>>>> projects and flooding my inbox is just frustrating and isn't going to >>>>>> cause >>>>>> me to start. The web interface for mailing list archives is truly >>>>>> horrendous. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 16:52:36 +0100, Torsten Curdt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Was it mentioned that anybody would be forbidden to subscribe to any >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ML they see fit? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You missed my point - but never mind. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What was it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Judging from your comments below, you completely missed mine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That comparison is pretty flawed as those projects are not tiny >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> components. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm not talking about the size of components, but the size of the >>>>>>>>> ML traffic. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So just because a component/project has a lot of ML traffic you >>>>>>>> want >>>>>>>> to make it TLP? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I never said that. >>>>>>> I'm only complaining about ML traffic. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Usually it should be about having enough active committers and >>>>>>> users. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> While this might contribute to ML traffic, it doesn't necessarily >>>>>>>> mean the same. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've never a great fan of umbrellas but the components are so >>>>>>>> small - >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I don't see another option. The thought of components to go TLP >>>>>>>>>> feels >>>>>>>>>> just plain silly to me. Hence it would be great to work together >>>>>>>>>> as a >>>>>>>>>> community that takes care of those components. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The idea of "Commons Math" being a component is silly, but we can >>>>>>>>> accept >>>>>>>>> silly things that result from history (and consider the practical >>>>>>>>> advantages, as I noted elsewhere). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, by the current definition it's not an Apache project. Call >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>> sub-project if you like - I don't care. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What I'm calling "project" is a _programming_ project; that's the >>>>>>> word >>>>>>> I'm used to; do you have another one? >>>>>>> Every component is a separate programming project, it's a simple >>>>>>> fact. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At some stage we decided to call it component. After all I see it >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> a library. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Do you think it's more and needs to be raised to the level to full >>>>>>>> blown project like hadoop or httpd? >>>>>>>> Not sure it Math holds that comparison but you are welcome to >>>>>>>> convince >>>>>>>> us. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think that this has nothing to do with this thread. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If it depends on the name of the list, I guess that the "sense of >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> community" is not very developed... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And that's what I call an oversimplification. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You brought that up (one community == one list). Or another missed >>>>>>> point? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gilles >>>>>>> >>>>>> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
