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] <mailto:bjorn.mailinglists%40gmail.com>>
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
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.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
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.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 <http://www.cubicleman.com>
>> > > > this is my signature, like it?
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
