On Monday, August 10, 2015, Steve Rowe <sar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 9, 2015, at 8:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > > <bdelacre...@apache.org <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 3:48 AM, jay vyas <jayunit100.apa...@gmail.com > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >>> ...1) We have to trust PMCs to foster a healthy and transparent > roadmap. > >>> Exclusive cliques and backchannels should not ever exist in a healthy > ASF > >>> project, period.... > >> > >> That's where our "if it didn't happen on the project's dev list, it > >> didn't happen" rule comes from. > >> > >> Multiple communications channels are inevitable, our rule is simply > >> that someone who's using just the project's dev mailing should not > >> miss anything important. They'll just have less chatter I guess. > > > > And I guess that answers my question on how much Slack is compatible > > with "Apache Way". With an aspiration of trying to kill email (*) -- not > much. > > > > Thanks, > > Roman. > > > > (*) > http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/12/5991005/slack-is-killing-email-yes-really > > If Slack could be configured to send a periodic transcript to the > project’s dev mailing list, problem solved, no?
That would solve it in theory at least halfway, but how do you get the reactions from people only using ML back into slack. Remember it is totally valid only to communicate on ML, Slack and other media are secondary. rgds jan i -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
