Out of morbid curiosity, am I the only one who has multiple email lists all being filtered into the same mega-list? I have flexcoders, flexcomponents, apollocoders, papervision, degrafa, flexlib, and flexjobs all dropped into a mondo folder in gmail. I color code each list accordingly so I can at a glance see which list a message is from, but typically I read them all in the master list. Nobody else does this? Somehow I can stay on top of it all, although I'm sure you could argue that at times it's certainly not helping my productivity :)
Doug On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Bjorn Schultheiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > cool. > > This discussion needs some resolving though. > > I'm all for the creation of another 15 lists. > With all the cross-posting, subject-meta, gmail, stats, > my-left-arm-is-longer-than-my-right arguments, my vote is still with > the split. > > best-practices, architecture, components, unit-testing, deployment, > flash-flex, remote services, java-flex architectures, design ux, > announcements, etc.. > > lets do it. > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Freiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I think of "Best Practices" and "Architecture/Concepts" as separate but >> overlapping categories so I guess that's why I thought no one else > brought >> it up. >> >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Bjorn Schultheiss < >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > > Also, to Bjorn, that's a point I hadn't thought of. The idea of >> > having an >> > > arch/concepts list might be interesting. The two questions I > would have >> > > would be: 1) would the questions on this list have any connection to >> > Flex >> > >> > Anatole mentioned it earlier in a 'Best Practices' list. >> > >> > For example at MAX thy had that Best Practices panel and some >> > interesting topics were brought up and discussed. >> > >> > From my point of view I'm always learning. >> > It would be an interesting read for me. >> > >> > >> > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, > "Daniel >> > Freiman" <FreimanCQ@> wrote: >> > > >> > > I agree that a FAQ seems like a good idea no matter what. Is anyone >> > against >> > > this idea independent of the argument of whether or not to split the >> > list? >> > > >> > > As far as splitting lists, I still think if people want to propose >> > potential >> > > new lists, they need to be much more explicit about what the list >> > will be >> > > for. I'll take the "enterprise" example. Let's assume for a second >> > it has >> > > only one correct meaning (which is an assumption I agree with, > but many >> > > people disagree with me on that). "Enterprise" has become a >> > buzzword with >> > > many different commonly understood meanings, and most of those >> > meanings are >> > > vague. There's no way for everyone on the list to be sure that we're >> > > talking about the same thing unless someone explicitly spells out >> > what we >> > > are talking about (I'm not going to because I'm against having a >> > > "enterprise" list given every way I know to interpret the word). >> > And if we >> > > don't have a common understanding of the proposal we can't > efficiently >> > > criticize/support/amend the proposal. I'm not saying there has to >> > be a fine >> > > line separating the lists, but it should at least be a fuzzy line. >> > > >> > > Also, to Bjorn, that's a point I hadn't thought of. The idea of >> > having an >> > > arch/concepts list might be interesting. The two questions I > would have >> > > would be: 1) would the questions on this list have any connection to >> > Flex >> > > other than the fact that the users code in Flex (I think it probably >> > would) >> > > or would it just be piggybacking on the user base; 2) Will it avoid >> > > stratification of the user base (i.e. will it be practically >> > accessible to >> > > users of all skill levels)? >> > > >> > > Lastly, I'm going to reiterate my opinion that we shouldn't > separate the >> > > lists based on skill/level difficulty. The distinction is too fuzzy >> > (Too >> > > much cross-posting and too much posting to the wrong list). >> > Sometimes you >> > > don't know if you're question is advanced or not until you get the >> > answer. >> > > I've had a few times where I've asked what I thought was a simple >> > question >> > > and the response from Gordon was "I talked to a guy on the player >> > team..." >> > > If a question has a one line answer it can't be complex...unless > the one >> > > line required going through the player or compiler code to > understand it >> > > (sorry for the overstatement). >> > > >> > > - Daniel Freiman >> > > >> > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Douglas Knudsen <douglasknudsen@> >> > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Having been on this list since 2004, yeah back when the Iteration >> > > > folks were not Adobe Robe Wearers yet, I've seen this > discussion come >> > > > up a few times. I've asked for a associated FAQ a few times, but >> > > > there was no interest from the Iteration folks on this or > splitting up >> > > > things, no offense Alistair or Stephen you more than rocked with >> > > > helping this community. I'd certainly agree to a good FAQ be made >> > > > available and sent to the list monthly for all to be reminded > and have >> > > > it linked at the footer. >> > > > >> > > > Bjorn has a good point later in this thread about the idea that >> > > > answers are terse due to volume. >> > > > >> > > > Matt, I do agree with your #1, but #2 and #3 sounds too much > like list >> > > > mommies or invitations for list mommies. Something quite > uncommon to >> > > > the best of my recollection on flexcoders is the real need for > list >> > > > mommies. >> > > > >> > > > I'm in Anatole's camp on this, having multiple lists could be >> > > > beneficial to all as well as the community. Do we know this for a >> > > > fact? Nope, my crystal ball isn't helping, but it has with > many other >> > > > topics in the past. Conversely it may have hindered others, but >> > > > perhaps because the introduction of split lists was premature, who >> > > > knows. Hey, there are already multiple lists, besides > flexcomponents >> > > > there is HOF_Flex for one and the India based list too, I'm > sure there >> > > > are others. >> > > > >> > > > I suggest we start off with a couple very generic variants. >> > > > flexcoders_enterprise seems ok to me, those that work with > enterprise >> > > > tools would find it obvious. leave flexcoders as is, add in a >> > > > designer centric list, and a advanced list and go from there, > revisit >> > > > in a few months to see how it went. >> > > > >> > > > Oh, BTW< there are other email readers that do threaded tricks > like >> > > > GMail...though I don't use them. :) >> > > > >> > > > DK >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Matt Chotin >> > <mchotin@<mchotin%40adobe.com>> >> > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > Hey folks, let's calm down a little here, K? >> > > > > >> > > > > Alright, based on what I've been seeing people say, here's my >> > suggestion. >> > > > > >> > > > > 1) Let's get an FAQ going that can be edited by moderators or >> > members of >> > > > the >> > > > > community. This will be about common problems that folks run >> > into. One >> > > > > suggestion of course from me would be that we use the > Cookbook for >> > > > "how-to" >> > > > > type questions. But for things that don't seem like they're > cookbook >> > > > > appropriate, we can put them in the FAQ. I like the idea of >> > doing it in >> > > > > Buzzword, though Buzzword docs won't come up in Google. >> > Long-term I think >> > > > > the right place might be in whatever we set up in the Adobe >> > Developer >> > > > > Center. But for now how about we just allocate a page off of the >> > > > opensource >> > > > > wiki. We can pick some moderators who can edit the page and I >> > will get >> > > > them >> > > > > added so they can take care of it. We can also add the link to >> > the FAQ to >> > > > > the bottom of every email. >> > > > > >> > > > > 2) Some folks suggested that you either mark in the body or > in the >> > > > subject >> > > > > something that indicates what you're talking about. Seems >> > reasonable. We >> > > > > could use some of the topics that were being suggested. [UX], >> > > > [Enterprise], >> > > > > [Data Services] [Announce], etc. We don't need to limit > this, but by >> > > > > following a convention of placing the general area of >> > discussion, folks >> > > > will >> > > > > know if they're going to be capable of getting involved in the >> > thread. >> > > > The >> > > > > more people follow this convention, the more efficient it will >> > become. >> > > > > >> > > > > 3) We can get aggressive on the moderation. Rather than just >> > scanning for >> > > > > spam, moderators can actually look at the posts by new users and >> > decide >> > > > if >> > > > > they meet the general criteria for asking a question. If they >> > don't, the >> > > > > moderator can reject the post and point the user to the forum >> > FAQ which >> > > > has >> > > > > posting guidelines. >> > > > > >> > > > > 4) We can update the flexcoders FAQ (which is actually > linked at the >> > > > bottom >> > > > > of every single post) to include the updated posting > guidelines and >> > > > remove >> > > > > the common questions section so that the forum FAQ is only about >> > forum >> > > > > etiquette and the coding FAQ is about the actual problems. >> > > > > >> > > > > If this sounds OK then what we need are the two kinds of > moderators: >> > > > > >> > > > > 1. moderators for the forum itself who are willing to really >> > look at all >> > > > > posts that are in moderation and analyze whether they should be >> > passed >> > > > > through. If it is a poorly formed question, the post should be >> > rejected >> > > > with >> > > > > a pointer to the forum FAQ. >> > > > > 2. moderators for the FAQ who can pay attention to common >> > questions and >> > > > > update the FAQ as appropriate. >> > > > > >> > > > > If we're all on board, send those moderators to me and we can >> > get things >> > > > set >> > > > > up. And folks can start following the tagging convention >> > instantly in the >> > > > > meantime. >> > > > > >> > > > > Matt >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Douglas Knudsen >> > > > http://www.cubicleman.com >> > > > this is my signature, like it? >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >
