Open Stack

Definitely +1 for splitting -- it becomes overwhelmed. We'll soon need
regexps just to handle the incoming emails :) Having separate mailing lists
would make it easier to stay focused and concentrate on needed projects.


On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 15/11/13 11:06 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>
>> Wow, lots of different opinions! let's try to summarize:
>>
>> Arguments in favor of splitting openstack-dev / stackforge-dev
>> * People can easily filter out all non-openstack discussions
>> * Traffic would drop by about 25%
>> * Removes confusion as to which projects are actually "in openstack"
>>
>>
> Again, +1 for splitting!
>
>
>  Arguments in favor of keeping it the same
>> * Provides a cross-pollination forum where external projects can learn
>>
>
> This can still happen. People can still subscribe to both lists and
> reply / create threads as long as they belong to that list. This
> 'split' is more an 'organization' of emails than an actuall 'split'
> because it's not intended to split the community but to ease the
> interaction among it.
>
> Cheers,
> FF
>
>
>  * More chaos creates more innovation
>>
>> Personally I was fine with having everyone in the same "burgeoning city"
>> (to quote the lyrical Clint) until we recently crossed the bar of making
>> that city painful for a lot of people. Especially the people who work on
>> serving the needs of all OpenStack projects (think release management,
>> doc, QA, infra) and who have to pay some level of attention to every
>> thread.
>>
>> Yes, those people can filter out all stackforge discussions into a
>> separate folder: identify all the corresponding prefixes and setting
>> filters for them (and praying that they would all just use the right
>> suffixes). But rather than forcing everyone to go through that setup,
>> why not set up a list and make it more convenient for everyone to apply
>> different (or similar !) reading rules to the two different groups.
>>
>> Because they ARE two different groups. One is "OpenStack" and must get
>> the extra attention of all the people working on horizontal functions
>> (that is what incubation is about, carefully controlling access to extra
>> common resources). The other is "not yet OpenStack", free-for-all. The
>> latter group clearly benefits from being on the same list: they get
>> extra attention from all those smart OpenStack people, and their
>> marketing can benefit from the very blurry line between openstack and
>> not-yet-openstack we maintain on the list.
>>
>> In summary, I certainly see the benefits of a single list for stackforge
>> developers (and why people working on a limited number of vertical
>> projects don't really mind either way...). But I fear that we maintain
>> those benefits at the expense of the sanity of the horizontal programs
>> in openstack, and therefore lower the quality of OpenStack as a result.
>>
>> PS: I don't think we can reach consensus on that one -- we might need to
>> push it to the TC to make a final call.
>>
>> --
>> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
> --
> @flaper87
> Flavio Percoco
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



-- 
Sincerely, Ruslan Kiianchuk.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131115/424d716f/attachment.html>