On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 06:40:23AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > "Thierry Carrez" <thierry.car...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > >I can chime in, I was there. > > > >Jorge Castro was present and said he noticed the Ubuntu Server team > >didn't really chat in #ubuntu-server at all, and the channel was quite > >dead from a "team discussion" perspective. It was just made of > >unanswered support questions that echoed in a big void, which looked bad. > > > >In my case, actually having those unanswered questions kind of prevent > >me from using the channel for random development chat. I don't feel like > >appearing as an insensitive developer that continues his work and jokes > >with co-workers while people beg for help on the channel. And most of > >the time I could help them, if only I had the free time[tm] to do so. > > > >So I support the idea that having a separate support channel for -server > >would result in a more lively server development channel, where you > >could chat about development without (directly) appearing like a > >careless bastard^H^H overworked person. When/if I have time to do server > >support, I move to the other channel and answer questions. There is > >value in having separated topics. > > > >That said, I agree that support should go somewhere well defined, rather > >than just being "removed from topic". I've no opinion on how best to > >separate them: > > > >* #ubuntu-server = dev // #??? = support > >* #ubuntu-server = support // #ubuntu-server-dev = dev > >* ... > > > >The second option might actually be more discoverable, since developers > >will know where development talk occurs, while it's difficult to change > >the habits of the unwashed masses. > > > > And yet I regularly hear Canonical wishing for more engagement from the > server community in development activities. I think if you would invest some > time in engaging this community instead of avoiding it you would get more > engagement in return. > > I mix development discussion with other support related chat and don't sense > any negativity from it. The most I have to do is occasionally tell someone I > either don't have time to help them or don't know the answer to their > question. Generally people understand this. I think only once or twice in > years was this a problem. > > I think your reticence to use the channel is the thing that needs changing > here, not the channel. > > Scott K
Thanks for the background, Thierry, and to Soren and Scott for helping flesh it out. It sounds like the biggest issue is that we need better support for server users, and that should be reflected in the blueprint. If we can successfully encourage better support, it sounds like the existing channel will work fine. If not, then splitting the channel might help the devel side, but may hurt efforts to build community, which is the purpose of the blueprint. Are any other IRC channels active in terms of support, e.g. for virtualization or UEC? #ubuntu-virt? #ubuntu-ec2? I'll try to get more active helping with support in u-s. Always a good way to learn how to improve the distro. Cheers, Neal McBurnett http://neal.mcburnett.org/ -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
