Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 16:00, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> a écrit :
> Sylvain Bauza wrote: > > > > > > Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 14:41, Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org > > <mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org>> a écrit : > > > > On 2018-09-18 11:26:57 +0900 (+0900), Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > > [...] > > > I can understand that IRC cannot be used in China which is very > > > painful and mostly it is used weChat. > > [...] > > > > I have yet to hear anyone provide first-hand confirmation that > > access to Freenode's IRC servers is explicitly blocked by the > > mainland Chinese government. There has been a lot of speculation > > that the usual draconian corporate firewall policies (surprise, the > > rest of the World gets to struggle with those too, it's not just a > > problem in China) are blocking a variety of messaging protocols from > > workplace networks and the people who encounter this can't tell the > > difference because they're already accustomed to much of their other > > communications being blocked at the border. I too have heard from > > someone who's heard from someone that "IRC can't be used in China" > > but the concrete reasons why continue to be missing from these > > discussions. > > > > Thanks fungi, that's the crux of the problem I'd like to see discussed > > in the governance change. > > In this change, it states the non-use of existing and official > > communication tools as to be "cumbersome". See my comment on PS1, I > > thought the original concern was technical. > > > > Why are we discussing about WeChat now ? Is that because a large set of > > our contributors *can't* access IRC or because they *prefer* any other ? > > In the past, we made clear for a couple of times why IRC is our > > communication channel. I don't see those reasons to be invalid now, but > > I'm still open to understand the problems about why our community > > becomes de facto fragmented. > > Agreed, I'm still trying to grasp the issue we are trying to solve here. > > We really need to differentiate between technical blockers (firewall), > cultural blockers (language) and network effect preferences (preferred > platform). > > We should definitely try to address technical blockers, as we don't want > to exclude anyone. We can also allow for a bit of flexibility in the > tools used in our community, to accommodate cultural blockers as much as > we possibly can (keeping in mind that in the end, the code has to be > written, proposed and discussed in a single language). We can even > encourage community members to reach out on local social networks... But > I'm reluctant to pass an official resolution to recommend that TC > members engage on specific platforms because "everyone is there". > > I second your opinion on this. Before voting on a TC resolution, we first need at least to understand the problem. Like I said previously, stating 'cumbersome' in the proposed resolution doesn't imply a technical issue hence me jumping straight on the 3rd possibility you mentioned, which is "by convenience". In that case, the TC should rather reinforce the message that, as a whole community, we try to avoid silos and that contributors should be highly encouraged to stop discussing on other channels but the official ones. Having the First Contact SIG be the first line for helping those people to migrate to IRC (by helping them understand how it works, how to play with, which kind of setup is preferrable (bouncers)) seems a great idea. -Sylvain -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
