package maintainers please choose a package group

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
43 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: package maintainers please choose a package group

Michele Martone-2
On 20170315@19:08, Michele Martone wrote:
> ...
> assuming the definition as in the link above (and attached, for future
> memory), then please ...    "community" group for sparsersb.
Whoops I had forgotten attaching the "dev-descr-two-groups" snippet from the
draft, "for future memory" -- remedying now ;-)

dev-descr-two-groups.txt (1K) Download Attachment
signature.asc (169 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: package maintainers please choose a package group

Carnë Draug
In reply to this post by jbect
On 15 March 2017 at 16:09, Julien Bect <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 15/03/2017 à 16:41, Carlo De Falco a écrit :
>>> Julien Bect wrote:
>>> More generally, I think that we (admins) should have a simple and systematic
>>> way of reaching *all* package maintainers.
>>>
>>> I suggest either of the following two options :
>>>
>>> a) Ask that all package maintainers should be subscribed to the
>>> [hidden email].
>>>
>>> b) If this list is considered to have too much traffic by some, perhaps
>>> should we create a more specific, low-traffic list, dedicated to
>>> general-purpose communications between OF admins and OF package maintainers
>>> ?
>>
>> Search the archives to see the reason why such list, that once existed, was
>> shut down and merged to the maintainers list.
>
> Since you seem to know the answer, why don't you just tell me ?
>

There was never an Octave Forge developers mailing list.  There was a
general purpose Octave Forge mailing list, kinda like core's help and
maintainers mailing merged into one, but for OF only.  It's archives
are still online [1].

The reason was to bring the two communities together and avoid
fragmentation.  Here's the whole thread discussing the mailing lists
[2] and the final announcement after discussion [3].  I think this was
around the same we moved to savannah, to share the same bug tracker
(I'm not 100% sure when that happened).

When it comes to provide help, it doesn't matter if it's help with
core or functions with a package.  Users often don't even get that the
function they are having problems comes from a package, and it's not
nice to send to another mailing list.

For developers, a lot of discussions mattered to both core and forge
developers so even though my initial proposal was to have a forge and a
core maintainers mailing list, in the end we merged the two.

This was more than 4 years ago, and the core maintainers mailing list
is a lot more active now.  Part of it I feel are things that ought to
be on the bug tracker or on the help mailing list, but even without
those it might still be too much for some package developers.

Maybe an OF announcement mailing list could be created for those
maintainers that can't follow the core maintainers mailing list.

Carnë

[1] https://sourceforge.net/p/octave/mailman/octave-dev/
[2] https://sourceforge.net/p/octave/mailman/octave-dev/thread/CAPOrs_2wz4XnHJ_H%2B1d3QWzXQMv4Kb3vz1418mO%2BRAu0B8JgTw%40mail.gmail.com/#msg30137075
[3] https://sourceforge.net/p/octave/mailman/message/30152424/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

OF announcement list? (was: Re: package maintainers please choose a package group)

Olaf Till-2
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 07:51:16PM +0000, Carnë Draug wrote:

> ...
> > Le 15/03/2017 à 16:41, Carlo De Falco a écrit :
> >>> Julien Bect wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>> I suggest either of the following two options :
> >>>
> >>> a) Ask that all package maintainers should be subscribed to the
> >>> [hidden email].
> >>>
> >>> b) If this list is considered to have too much traffic by some, perhaps
> >>> should we create a more specific, low-traffic list, dedicated to
> >>> general-purpose communications between OF admins and OF package maintainers
> >>> ...
> >>
> >> Search the archives to see the reason why such list, that once existed, was
> >> shut down and merged to the maintainers list.
> >
> > ...
>
> There was never an Octave Forge developers mailing list.  There was a
> general purpose Octave Forge mailing list, kinda like core's help and
> maintainers mailing merged into one, but for OF only.  It's archives
> are still online [1].
>
> The reason was to bring the two communities together and avoid
> fragmentation.  Here's the whole thread discussing the mailing lists
> [2] and the final announcement after discussion [3].  I think this was
> around the same we moved to savannah, to share the same bug tracker
> (I'm not 100% sure when that happened).
>
> When it comes to provide help, it doesn't matter if it's help with
> core or functions with a package.  Users often don't even get that the
> function they are having problems comes from a package, and it's not
> nice to send to another mailing list.
>
> For developers, a lot of discussions mattered to both core and forge
> developers so even though my initial proposal was to have a forge and a
> core maintainers mailing list, in the end we merged the two.
>
> This was more than 4 years ago, and the core maintainers mailing list
> is a lot more active now.  Part of it I feel are things that ought to
> be on the bug tracker or on the help mailing list, but even without
> those it might still be too much for some package developers.
>
> Maybe an OF announcement mailing list could be created for those
> maintainers that can't follow the core maintainers mailing list.
>
> Carnë
There are many consequences of such a change to think over, and
problems either way... some thoughts:

Package maintainers should ideally all follow the development list. If
they don't, they should have a valid contact address in the package,
which can be used for urgent cases specific to this package.

We make some effort to reach even non-attending maintainers, to avoid
consequences to end users. But how much effort is made must be weighed
up against inconvenience for the others.

An announcement list is not sure to help. Even if we automatically
subscribe all package maintainers -- their addresses may get invalid.

Avoid mail duplication:

- Announcement list should get only announcements. Any discussion
  drifting into development should move over to development list.

- Development list should not duplicate announcements.

So we actually may reach some people less with a new list: If they
follow the development list but are not reached by the announcement
list.

Taken together I'd tend to keep the current state as long as possible,
and to limit our efforts to reach non-attending maintainers to
selected cases.

Olaf

> [1] https://sourceforge.net/p/octave/mailman/octave-dev/
> [2] https://sourceforge.net/p/octave/mailman/octave-dev/thread/CAPOrs_2wz4XnHJ_H%2B1d3QWzXQMv4Kb3vz1418mO%2BRAu0B8JgTw%40mail.gmail.com/#msg30137075
> [3] https://sourceforge.net/p/octave/mailman/message/30152424/
>

--
public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
123
Loading...