Idea: waterway@subversion.apache.org mailing list

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Idea: waterway@subversion.apache.org mailing list

Daniel Shahaf-2
Would it be useful to have a mailing list dedicated for communications
between us (upstream developers) and various downstream packagers and
distributors?

I suppose this basically boils down to whether downstream
packagers/distributors are happy to follow this list (or users@, which
we occasionally use for minor announcements / calls for testing), or
whether a channel of lower volume than those two but higher than
announce@ would be useful.

Thoughts?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Idea: waterway@subversion.apache.org mailing list

Julian Foad-5
Daniel Shahaf wrote:

> Would it be useful to have a mailing list dedicated for communications
> between us (upstream developers) and various downstream packagers and
> distributors?
>
> I suppose this basically boils down to whether downstream
> packagers/distributors are happy to follow this list (or users@, which
> we occasionally use for minor announcements / calls for testing), or
> whether a channel of lower volume than those two but higher than
> announce@ would be useful.
>
> Thoughts?

I think it's totally unreasonable to expect downstream people to follow
dev@ or users@. I think we should consider putting minor announcements
and (infrequent, targeted) calls for testing on announce@, to solve that
part. Does then following announce@ and the security channel(s) not work
well enough for distributors? Is it too hard or non-obvious for them to
communicate back to us perhaps, or any other problems you have been
thinking of?

I have heard it said that it works best to designate a mailing
list/channel/group for a given *topic* rather than for a given set of
*people*. Perhaps you could re-frame your idea in those terms?

- Julian
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Idea: waterway@subversion.apache.org mailing list

Johan Corveleyn-3
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Julian Foad <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Would it be useful to have a mailing list dedicated for communications
>> between us (upstream developers) and various downstream packagers and
>> distributors?
>>
>> I suppose this basically boils down to whether downstream
>> packagers/distributors are happy to follow this list (or users@, which
>> we occasionally use for minor announcements / calls for testing), or
>> whether a channel of lower volume than those two but higher than
>> announce@ would be useful.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I think it's totally unreasonable to expect downstream people to follow
> dev@ or users@. I think we should consider putting minor announcements
> and (infrequent, targeted) calls for testing on announce@, to solve that
> part. Does then following announce@ and the security channel(s) not work
> well enough for distributors? Is it too hard or non-obvious for them to
> communicate back to us perhaps, or any other problems you have been
> thinking of?

I'm wondering whether it's indeed easy enough for them to communicate
back to us. Announce@ is a one-way channel I suppose.

Of course they could give feedback or ask questions via users@ or
dev@. But then the other downstream people (who might be having the
same problems / thoughts) wouldn't pick that up, because as you said
it's unreasonable to expect them to follow those lists. I.e. they
might learn from each other, or reinforce each other's complaints ( /
praise) towards us. Or discuss various ideas (e.g. for API needs)
amongst themselves together with us devs.

Maybe one of the downstreamers that happens to read this could chime
in with their thoughts? Right now we're mostly hypothesizing from our
end ...

--
Johan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Idea: waterway@subversion.apache.org mailing list

Daniel Shahaf-2
In reply to this post by Julian Foad-5
Julian Foad wrote on Mon, 21 Aug 2017 12:48 +0100:
> I have heard it said that it works best to designate a mailing
> list/channel/group for a given *topic* rather than for a given set of
> *people*. Perhaps you could re-frame your idea in those terms?

Certainly.  In this specific case, the idea was for us (upstream) to
communicate to distro packagers and client maintainers in their role as
proxies of users: since 99% of users don't read announce@, if we want a
message from us to reach users it will help if, say, the various client GUIs
will advertise 1.10.0-beta1 on their blogs and so on.

Then there's the question of where to direct that feedback to.  Traditionally
it'd be dev@ or users@, but perhaps some users would be more inclined to
send feedback if there were a means of doing so without posting to a mailing
list (for example, a web form on svn-qavm.a.o).  I.e., lower the barrier to
participation for feedback senders.

Part of the feedback we're seeking is feedback about new APIs.  Right now,
there is no easy solution for an API consumer who wants to keep track of
changes: either follow dev@ or commits@ and accept the low [for that
use-case] SNR, or follow announce@ and get a message once a year or so,
about all changes over the last 18 months… which is generally long after the
design discussions have finished [and, sometimes, after the developer's
funding has run out].

The common thread in all this is how to reach our users and API consumers so
as to set up a feedback loop.

Creating mailing lists is trivial.  The hard problem is knowing what mailing
lists to create and getting the target audience to subscribe to them; and
it's hard to do _that_ without having a preëxisting way to talk to the
target audience…

Cheers,

Daniel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Idea: waterway@subversion.apache.org mailing list

Joe Orton
In reply to this post by Johan Corveleyn-3
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 03:28:35PM +0200, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> Maybe one of the downstreamers that happens to read this could chime
> in with their thoughts? Right now we're mostly hypothesizing from our
> end ...

As a downstream package owner (Fedora/RHEL) I'd be happy to subscribe to
a low traffic list for announcements and discussion with upstream.  I
can usually scan dev@ every month or so but not in detail.

Regards, Joe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Idea: waterway@subversion.apache.org mailing list

Johan Corveleyn-3
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Joe Orton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 03:28:35PM +0200, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> Maybe one of the downstreamers that happens to read this could chime
>> in with their thoughts? Right now we're mostly hypothesizing from our
>> end ...
>
> As a downstream package owner (Fedora/RHEL) I'd be happy to subscribe to
> a low traffic list for announcements and discussion with upstream.  I
> can usually scan dev@ every month or so but not in detail.
>
> Regards, Joe

Great, thanks for letting us know, Joe.

--
Johan