Typically these discussions have multiple aspects to it and we end up bringing perspectives to each aspect. If there is such a topic then I'd think the WIKI is a good place. There could be one description of the problem and comments by the community at various points. So at any time one knows what's the spine of the problem being discussed and to which aspect a bunch of comments relate to. Ofcourse there will be mail that just about summarizes the problem in about 5 lines and provides a link to the wiki page. Maybe with every update the person updating could post back to the ML an anchor to what as been added to the Wiki. My 2 cents.
- Venkat On Feb 5, 2008 5:28 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote: > > Simon Nash wrote: > >> Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote: > > [snip] > >>> - route the JIRA traffic out of the dev list as suggested by Matthieu > >>> > >> I understand that this traffic can get a bit overwhelming at times, but > >> I'd like to make the case that it does have value for new developers > >> (though not for users). One of the best ways to start down the path to > >> becoming a contributor and committer is through writing or fixing > JIRAs. > >> Having the JIRA traffic appear on the dev list helps people to see what > >> JIRAs others are writing and can encourage new contributors to jump in > >> with a comment or a fix, or to write other JIRAs themselves. > >> > > > > I could be convinced either way :) > > > > Some projects have a separate issues list, but it's one more list for > > people to subscribe to. > > > > Or can we configure JIRA to only send a message when a comment is added > > to an issue? > > > >>> - improve mailing list communication with shorter and clearer emails > >>> > >> This is a good idea, and will help improve many of our mailing list > >> exchanges. It does raise the question of what do we do when we need > >> to have some in-depth discussion that might be a bit rambling with a > few > >> blind alleys along the way. Can this be done effectively with > scheduled > >> IRC chats, as we used to have? My recollection is that we did not > >> usually discuss or resolve deep technical topics on these chats. > >> What about phone calls? (This is what my company would do in such > >> cases.) I have an account that offers worldwide toll-free access > >> numbers, so cost wouldn't be an issue, but this isn't considered the > >> Apache Way because of time zone issues and scheduling conflicts. > >> What do people think is the best way to conduct this other kind of > >> deeper discussion? > >> > > [snip] > > > > We should use email as it's public, asynchronous and archived. We need > > to try to keep them to the point, and perhaps use our Wiki to summarize > > the discussions. > > > The point of my question was to ask what else we could do when email > isn't sufficient to resolve a difficult technical issue. I think we > have seen this happen a number of times, where a thread peters out with > no consensus or decision. I'd be interested in other views on this. > > Simon > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
