Re: Discussion Forums?

[Greg Stein]

Anywhere is just fine. You will have to work harder for discoverability,
but the Foundation has never mandated on-our-hardware for community
interactions.

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Seb Kiureghian  wrote:

> Thanks Greg! Just want to clarify, if the community intends to use the
> forum as a primary mode of handling user support, does it need to be hosted
> on the VM provided by Apache, or can we host it elsewhere?
>
> Thanks,
> Seb
>
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Seb Kiureghian 
> > wrote:
> > >...
> >
> > > Discourse is open source so we can host it on Apache infrastructure and
> > > include it on our site.
> >
> >
> > To be clear: each community gets a single VM, and they are responsible
> for
> > running that VM (we provide a base level system, with appropriate
> > monitoring, updates, etc; we do not handle apps). You can choose to run
> > Discourse on that, if you like. Or you may want to reserve the VM for
> other
> > services/demos/testing. The Infrastructure team will *not*
> > run/manage/operate a Discourse instance. Your community will be
> responsible
> > for the operation and maintenance of Discourse.
> >
> > The Apache Software Foundation does not require you to use ASF resources,
> > except for version control, and your project web site. But there is a
> > "discoverable" issue, which leads all of our communities to follow a
> > standard pattern, built around an apache.org website and mailing lists.
> >
> > But if you'd like to run Discourse, that will require an ongoing
> commitment
> > from the MXNet community, in perpetuity. Discuss with your Mentors, and
> if
> > that is your decision, then have a Mentor file a ticket for a VM.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Greg Stein
> > Infrastructure Administrator, ASF
> >
>

Re: Discussion Forums?

[Greg Stein]

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Seb Kiureghian  wrote:
>...

> Discourse is open source so we can host it on Apache infrastructure and
> include it on our site.


To be clear: each community gets a single VM, and they are responsible for
running that VM (we provide a base level system, with appropriate
monitoring, updates, etc; we do not handle apps). You can choose to run
Discourse on that, if you like. Or you may want to reserve the VM for other
services/demos/testing. The Infrastructure team will *not*
run/manage/operate a Discourse instance. Your community will be responsible
for the operation and maintenance of Discourse.

The Apache Software Foundation does not require you to use ASF resources,
except for version control, and your project web site. But there is a
"discoverable" issue, which leads all of our communities to follow a
standard pattern, built around an apache.org website and mailing lists.

But if you'd like to run Discourse, that will require an ongoing commitment
from the MXNet community, in perpetuity. Discuss with your Mentors, and if
that is your decision, then have a Mentor file a ticket for a VM.

Cheers,
Greg Stein
Infrastructure Administrator, ASF

Re: Discussion Forums?

[Chris Mattmann]

Thanks, Seb.

 

 

 

From: Seb Kiureghian <sebou...@gmail.com>
Reply-To: "sebou...@gmail.com" <sebou...@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 4:30 PM
To: "dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org" <dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org>
Cc: "mattm...@apache.org" <mattm...@apache.org>, "gene...@incubator.apache.org" 
<gene...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Discussion Forums?

 

are you making it so that the default way to interact with *Apache* MXNet (note 
emphasis) to not be on Apache infrastructure?

 

Discourse is open source so we can host it on Apache infrastructure and include 
it on our site. I will suggest PonyMail on the original thread and see what the 
community thinks. Thanks for your feedback Chris.

 

Seb

 

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> wrote:

Hi,

I can’t stress this enough – tooling is all fine and dandy, but are you making 
it so that
the default way to interact with *Apache* MXNet (note emphasis) to not be on 
Apache
infrastructure?

There is no official policy other than if it didn’t happen on the list, it 
didn’t happen.
Decisions must be made on the mailing list, and frankly, as a casual observer 
of the dev
list I’m not entirely sure that decisions are occurring on the list right now.

Is there a reason not to use PonyMail? Or at least give it a try?

Chris



On 9/17/17, 4:16 PM, "Seb Kiureghian" <sebou...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Chris,

Members of the Apache MXNet community have pointed to the high level of
activity on Pytorch's forum <https://discuss.pytorch.org/> as a reason to

use Discourse. Discourse has a lot of great community features which make
it easier to have a discussion, follow specific questions, and learn
quickly, particularly for users new to deep learning. Discourse is open
source (GNU GPL) API and can also be integrated with the Apache mailing
lists, the way Nabble and PonyMail are. Is there an official stance or set
of guidelines wrt forums? Any guidance is appreciated.

Thanks!
-Seb Kiureghian



On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org>
wrote:

> What’s wrong with lists.apache.org as a forum?
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> On 9/15/17, 9:26 PM, "Henri Yandell" <bay...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> The MXNet community have been discussing the possibilities of a
> discussion
> forum. I suspect I'm out of date on the topic. Has there been 
Incubator
> discussion on forums in the past few years? Are there projects running
> forums? Discourse seems to be the current fashion.
>
> My dated assumption is that Apache tends to be -1 to forums, but then
> we
> had Nabble eking an existence on top of our lists as a semi-forum, 
then
> StackExchange creating de facto Q forums; so perhaps user forums are
> a
> thing now; or perhaps folk have their user@ mailing lists integrated
> with
> discourse/stackoverflow etc?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Hen
>
>
>
>



 

Re: Discussion Forums?

[Seb Kiureghian]

>
> are you making it so that the default way to interact with *Apache* MXNet
> (note emphasis) to not be on Apache infrastructure?


Discourse is open source so we can host it on Apache infrastructure and
include it on our site. I will suggest PonyMail on the original thread and
see what the community thinks. Thanks for your feedback Chris.

Seb

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Chris Mattmann  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I can’t stress this enough – tooling is all fine and dandy, but are you
> making it so that
> the default way to interact with *Apache* MXNet (note emphasis) to not be
> on Apache
> infrastructure?
>
> There is no official policy other than if it didn’t happen on the list, it
> didn’t happen.
> Decisions must be made on the mailing list, and frankly, as a casual
> observer of the dev
> list I’m not entirely sure that decisions are occurring on the list right
> now.
>
> Is there a reason not to use PonyMail? Or at least give it a try?
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> On 9/17/17, 4:16 PM, "Seb Kiureghian"  wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> Members of the Apache MXNet community have pointed to the high level of
> activity on Pytorch's forum  as a
> reason to
> use Discourse. Discourse has a lot of great community features which
> make
> it easier to have a discussion, follow specific questions, and learn
> quickly, particularly for users new to deep learning. Discourse is open
> source (GNU GPL) API and can also be integrated with the Apache mailing
> lists, the way Nabble and PonyMail are. Is there an official stance or
> set
> of guidelines wrt forums? Any guidance is appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
> -Seb Kiureghian
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Chris Mattmann 
> wrote:
>
> > What’s wrong with lists.apache.org as a forum?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/15/17, 9:26 PM, "Henri Yandell"  wrote:
> >
> > The MXNet community have been discussing the possibilities of a
> > discussion
> > forum. I suspect I'm out of date on the topic. Has there been
> Incubator
> > discussion on forums in the past few years? Are there projects
> running
> > forums? Discourse seems to be the current fashion.
> >
> > My dated assumption is that Apache tends to be -1 to forums, but
> then
> > we
> > had Nabble eking an existence on top of our lists as a
> semi-forum, then
> > StackExchange creating de facto Q forums; so perhaps user
> forums are
> > a
> > thing now; or perhaps folk have their user@ mailing lists
> integrated
> > with
> > discourse/stackoverflow etc?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Hen
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Re: Discussion Forums?

[Chris Mattmann]

Hi,

I can’t stress this enough – tooling is all fine and dandy, but are you making 
it so that
the default way to interact with *Apache* MXNet (note emphasis) to not be on 
Apache
infrastructure?

There is no official policy other than if it didn’t happen on the list, it 
didn’t happen. 
Decisions must be made on the mailing list, and frankly, as a casual observer 
of the dev
list I’m not entirely sure that decisions are occurring on the list right now.

Is there a reason not to use PonyMail? Or at least give it a try?

Chris



On 9/17/17, 4:16 PM, "Seb Kiureghian"  wrote:

Hi Chris,

Members of the Apache MXNet community have pointed to the high level of
activity on Pytorch's forum  as a reason to
use Discourse. Discourse has a lot of great community features which make
it easier to have a discussion, follow specific questions, and learn
quickly, particularly for users new to deep learning. Discourse is open
source (GNU GPL) API and can also be integrated with the Apache mailing
lists, the way Nabble and PonyMail are. Is there an official stance or set
of guidelines wrt forums? Any guidance is appreciated.

Thanks!
-Seb Kiureghian



On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Chris Mattmann 
wrote:

> What’s wrong with lists.apache.org as a forum?
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> On 9/15/17, 9:26 PM, "Henri Yandell"  wrote:
>
> The MXNet community have been discussing the possibilities of a
> discussion
> forum. I suspect I'm out of date on the topic. Has there been 
Incubator
> discussion on forums in the past few years? Are there projects running
> forums? Discourse seems to be the current fashion.
>
> My dated assumption is that Apache tends to be -1 to forums, but then
> we
> had Nabble eking an existence on top of our lists as a semi-forum, 
then
> StackExchange creating de facto Q forums; so perhaps user forums are
> a
> thing now; or perhaps folk have their user@ mailing lists integrated
> with
> discourse/stackoverflow etc?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Hen
>
>
>
>

Re: Discussion Forums?

[Chris Mattmann]

What’s wrong with lists.apache.org as a forum?

Cheers,
Chris




On 9/15/17, 9:26 PM, "Henri Yandell"  wrote:

The MXNet community have been discussing the possibilities of a discussion
forum. I suspect I'm out of date on the topic. Has there been Incubator
discussion on forums in the past few years? Are there projects running
forums? Discourse seems to be the current fashion.

My dated assumption is that Apache tends to be -1 to forums, but then we
had Nabble eking an existence on top of our lists as a semi-forum, then
StackExchange creating de facto Q forums; so perhaps user forums are a
thing now; or perhaps folk have their user@ mailing lists integrated with
discourse/stackoverflow etc?

Thanks,

Hen

Discussion Forums?

[Henri Yandell]

The MXNet community have been discussing the possibilities of a discussion
forum. I suspect I'm out of date on the topic. Has there been Incubator
discussion on forums in the past few years? Are there projects running
forums? Discourse seems to be the current fashion.

My dated assumption is that Apache tends to be -1 to forums, but then we
had Nabble eking an existence on top of our lists as a semi-forum, then
StackExchange creating de facto Q forums; so perhaps user forums are a
thing now; or perhaps folk have their user@ mailing lists integrated with
discourse/stackoverflow etc?

Thanks,

Hen