16 Jul
2012
16 Jul
'12
8:56 a.m.
On 16/07/12 09:41, Itamar Heim wrote: > On 07/16/2012 01:46 AM, Robert Middleswarth wrote: >> On 07/15/2012 03:59 PM, Ayal Baron wrote: >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>> >>>> On 07/15/2012 01:53 AM, Ayal Baron wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for cross-posting, but in this case I think it's relevant. >>>>> >>>>> The original idea was that every time we wish to discuss a new >>>>> cross-component feature we should do it over arch list. However, it >>>>> would appear that de-facto usually engine-devel and vdsm-devel are >>>>> being used (cross posted). Currently engine-devel has 211 >>>>> subscribers, arch has 160 and vdsm-devel has 128 so from this >>>>> perspective again, arch seems less relevant. I propose we ditch >>>>> arch and keep the other 2 mailing lists. I'm not sure whether new >>>>> cross-component features should be discussed solely on engine-devel >>>>> or cross-posted (there are probably people who wouldn't care about >>>>> engine side but would still like to know about such changes). >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts? >>>> - -1 >>>> >>>> I don't normally read engine-devel and vdsm-devel, so I hadn't >>>> noticed >>>> that discussions I would expect to be on arch@ are not happening >>>> here. >>>> I'm probably not the only person in that situation. >>>> >>>> If this project were 100% about Engine and VDSM, then I could >>>> understand your reasoning. But we've already added a few new >>>> incubating projects, we have subsystem teams such as documentation >>>> and >>>> infrastructure, and we all need a single location where we know we >>>> can >>>> reach *all* contributors to this project. >>>> >>>> If we try to force all that discussion on to engine-devel, not >>>> everyone would be interested. There is enough on engine-devel that is >>>> not general interest that it would become noise (as it has for me, so >>>> I filter it) or people would drop it all together. >>>> >>>> Perhaps what we need to do is have the discipline to cross-post *all* >>>> general interest discussions from the project mailing list back to >>>> arch@? Enforce the rule that decisions that affect the whole project >>>> have to be ratified on arch@ instead of whatever project list the >>>> discussions started on? Strongly suggest that all contributors be on >>>> arch@ and announce@ as a minimum? >>> I find that anything that should go on arch would interest anyone on >>> the devel lists (as it is about new features, design, etc) so I >>> believe that arch should have at least everyone on engine-devel and >>> vdsm-devel. >>> However, right now this is not the case as is evident by number of >>> subs to each list (e.g. I haven't compared to see if everyone on arch >>> is on engine). >>> So imo something needs to be done. >>> I'm fine with keeping arch, but as you said, that means we need to >>> enforce it to be *the* list for feature discussions and I'm not >>> exactly sure how you'd go about doing that. >> Maybe arch needs renamed to make it clear what if is for? >> >> Maybe something simple like ovirt-devel to make it clear it is for >> generally ovirt development? > > we can simply make it arch include the other mailing lists, so sending > to arch would be sending to all other mailing lists. What would happen if someone reply on the engine-list to a mail originally sent to arch? wouldn't we end-up starting a thread on arch and then loosing it to one of the other lists? > wouldn't resolve the dupes, but will resolve need of everyone to > subscribe to it as well. > (for dupes i also use a mail filter to delete emails arriving from > engine-devel and cc other mailing list, etc. > _______________________________________________ > Arch mailing list > Arch@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch