Mailing list scope proposal

[Livnat Peer]

On 24/08/12 19:29, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Over on infra@, we were having a discussion about whether it was best
> policy to subscribe lists to each other to help reduce the amount of
> cross-posting going on in the project (I for one find it a bit annoying
> to get 4 copies of a single email).
> 
> The answer to the technical question is that it's not, there are lots of
> good reasons to avoid subscribing lists to another mailing list, but
> that led to a discussion about whether we could tighten the scope of
> each of the lists, and reduce cross-posting that way, by making it
> clearer where people should be subscribed/where a topic is on- and
> off-topic.
> 
> So - here's my suggestion for that (and as per my suggestion, let's have
> this discussion here, and when we reach a consensus ask for the opinion
> of the board):
> 
> users@ - User issues - help, troubleshooting, configuration issues,
> sharing experiences, etc. Users at will have mostly technical users of
> oVirt or people in the process of installing it, plus some of the oVirt
> developers (but we'd like to encourage our more technical users to
> answer questions). The list could also serve as a gateway drug to
> contribution, and we should ask here for help for initiatives which do
> not require intimate knowledge of the code base - VDSM hooks, wiki
> editing, documentation drives, etc.
> 
> arch@ - rename to developers@ - This will be the key developer mailing
> list for oVirt, the place where we discuss project-wide changes, the
> roadmap for future versions, release planning, where people can perhaps
> propose patches for discussion, and where any issue affecting the
> developer governance of the project will be discussed.
> 
> board@ - Issues related to the non-technical governance of the project
> (ie things which require board approval). In the case of the website
> redesign, for example, a final design, discussed beforehand on
> developers@, would be submitted to board@ for approval.
> 
> infra@ - issues related to the management of oVirt infrastructure - web
> services, developer infrastructure, etc.
> 
> vdsm-devel, node-devel, engine-devel, *-devel: Low-traffic lists related
> to the specific implementation issues of the individual components.
> 
> In this schema, if you want to talk to the developers, you email
> developers@ - if you have a suggestion specific to vdsm, you might
> contact developers@ or vdsm-devel@ - but not both. Any mailing list
> thread to vdsm-devel@ which requires feedback from the maintainers of
> other projects should move to developers@ once that's ascertained.
> 
> How does that sound? Does anyone have other/better suggestions?
> 

+1, I think this is a good proposal.
I would try to avoid discussing patches on the developers list and try
to keep it more high level like design discussions etc.

Livnat



> Cheers,
> Dave.
>