Felix Meschberger wrote:
Hi,
Initially, I was convinced, too, that a users@ list would not be needed
given the current volume.
On the other hand, and as Niclas pointed out, more and more questions are
more like users@ questions than dev@ questions. Additionally, I tend
to see
a somewhat psychological aspect of having a users@ list: Maybe it is
better
for community building to have a low-barrier users@ list in addition
to the
dev@ list.
Therefore, I now agree with Niclas, that we probably need a users@ list.
I can go either way and I think Karl said he could too, so unless anyone
has any major objections, I guess we can go with a users mailing list.
This then raises another question. I assume that they move the mailing
list archives and subscriber list from the old list to the new
list...should the felix-dev archive and its subscribers move to dev or
users ?
-> richard
Just my €.02
Regards
Felix
On 4/19/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday 19 April 2007 03:31, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> I am not convinced that we need a "users" list, just brought it up for
> discussion.
I am convinced a users@ list is appropriate.
Just look at the last 10 threads on the current list (this one
excluded);
-1. Felix/OSGi and JADE Second Part -> users@
-2. bundle with felix.auto.start.2 are not starting -> users@
-3. new release -> dev@
-4. Bundle symbolic name not unique? -> users@
-5. Bundle repository -> users@
-6. [jira] Created: (FELIX-270) iPOJO Composition & Arch improve... ->
dev@
-7. Launching/Embedding docs -> both
-8. JADE and OSGI integration -> users@
-9. 101.6.4 of R4.1? Service Compendium -> dev@
-10. Felix TLP migration -> dev@
5 exclusive users@ list threads, 4 dev@ ones.
On top of that, it is likely (although not very strong argument) that
Felix
will get a lot more traction once visible as TLP, and even more so
with a
1.0
release out. That means more Jira issues, that most users don't want to
see,
et cetera.
Cheers
Niclas