Open Stack

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 01:22 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2015-03-13 08:06:43 -0700:
> > 
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > > Clint Byrum wrote:
> > > > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> > > > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> > > > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> > > > 
> > > > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> > > > on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> > > > digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> > > > filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> > > 
> > > The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
> > > know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some
> > > announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic
> > > and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to
> > > openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line
> > > drawn ?
> > > 
> > > The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
> > > case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
> > > python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
> > > the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
> > > announcements defeats that purpose.
> > > 
> > > We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to
> > > a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
> > > announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
> > > granted openstack-announce access ?
> > > 
> > > Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
> > > project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in
> > > a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
> > > We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
> > > are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's
> > > worth it.
> > > 
> > > So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
> > > I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two
> > > classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).
> > 
> > We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release
> > announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release
> > might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to
> > make it easy to create uniform and informative release note emails
> > containing the level of detail people wanted. So far those are only
> > being used by Oslo, but we're moving the scripts to the release-tools
> > repo to make them easy for all library maintainers to use.
> > 
> 
> This is really what I'm asking about. If people were less happy with not
> having them, then it makes sense to have them.
> 
> > These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the
> > folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are
> > we going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce
> > list complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are
> > enough developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the
> > release messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet?
> > 
> 
> I hope I don't come across as complaining. I archive them very rapidly
> without ever looking at the content currently. Sometimes they come up in
> my searches for topics and then having them in the single timeline is
> great, but I have an email reader that supports this without changing
> the list behavior. I am more wondering if people who aren't as optimized
> as I am have trouble keeping up with them. And having a few less things
> to archive manually would certainly be nicer for me, but is a secondary
> goal.
> 
> I haven't seen very much interest in changing things, mostly people in
> support of keeping them as-is. So I suspect people are not annoyed about
> this in particular, and we can close the book on this thread.

OK, I also don't want to give the impression that I don't want to change
things, but I want to make sure we still achieve the goals we had. If
there's a way to make the messages easier to process that doesn't "hide"
them from the audience that needs to see them, we can adjust our
processes.

Doug

> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev