Re: Dev vs User Mailing Lists
Repeating (with minor edits for this context) what I have said on
similar topics on other threads:
I don't think a WhatsApp group is a good idea.
The criteria that the ASF looks for in communication
channels used by projects are (in no particular order):
- open to all
- available off-line
- full history
- archived on ASF controlled systems
- low bandwidth / minimal system requirements
E-mail may seem a little 'old school' at times but it is one of the few
technologies that meets all of the above. Which is why most of our
systems are configured to echo stuff back to the relevant mailing list.
These days I'm used to an always on internet connections with speeds in
the 10s of megabits where I don't need to worry about the cost (even
when I am out and about) but it is worth remembering that not everyone
is in that position. It wasn't really that long ago that I could
sometimes be found working on Apache projects via a 9600 bits per second
dial-up connection that I paid for by the second. It was perfectly
possible for me to follow what was going on by connecting for a few
minutes every couple of hours, syncing my email, making a few commits if
I had anything to commit and then disconnecting and continuing to work
off-line. If a large proportion of communication had happened via a
WhatsApp like interface there is no way I would have been able to follow
I accept that there are times were using a 'real-time' communication
channel is more efficient. However, it excludes every member of the
community that isn't participating in that channel at that point in
time. The default position at the ASF is that it is better for
communication to be a little less efficient for a few in order for the
entire community to participate.
On 13/10/18 17:23, Javier Borkenztain wrote:
> Hi all, +1 on one single list with tags (there are at least 6 lists 😶)
> For the non-technical contributors like me, that most of my contribution to
> the community happens "out of the list", It will be useful to have only one
> place of reference.
> Also, I think we need a Whatsapp group, I am a member of several Whatsapp
> groups on Bitcoin and Blockchain, and they are much more efficient and fast
> to communicate non-technical issues, I've created the group, you can join
> it here: https://chat.whatsapp.com/BVsYOq5eOxqLrvbWnQ3Dck
> I really enjoyed the presentation
> <http://spf13.com/presentation/what-every-open-source-project-needs/> James
> Dailey shared a couple of months ago, the message that we are on the "Open
> Source Age" is as powerful and meaningful as ever.
> More and more Fintechs, Financial Institutions and Banks are joining our
> community and they are our partners and community members, as we grow, we
> need to welcome them, I here propose we can announce each new partner that
> joins our global community, I think Whatsapp group is great for that and
> the community to grow.
> We are changing an entire industry as a community because the community
> outperforms the individuals.
> Let's keep rocking!!
> El mié., 10 oct. 2018 a las 13:00, Ed Cable (<edcable@xxxxxxxxx>) escribió:
>> Reading over the escalation guide and the advice it gave on directing
>> appropriate issues/matters to the respective mailing lists, it got me
>> thinking about our Fineract Dev and Fineract User lists.
>> We are always trying to be inclusive especially around awarding merit or
>> committership in valuing non-technical contributions to the project. In
>> that same spirit, I worry we sometimes might be leaving out non-technical
>> members of the community who might only be subscribed to the user list when
>> we treat dev as the primary list for all communications (community-related,
>> etc whether they're technical or not).
>> I know we don't want to clutter the mailing lists and we don't want to
>> cross-post everything across both lists but what do ewe think are some ways
>> to address this?
>> One possible option is just to consolidate the lists into dev but I don't
>> think that is good long-term because as community grows we will have
>> distinct technical vs. functional/design conversations happening.
>> I know that user list is small but that might be a product of the fact that
>> we direct everyone to sign up for dev because most conversations happen on
>> Should everyone just operate under the norm that dev is the primary list
>> and any public community-related matter or announcement will come through
>> there and that everyone should be subscribed to that list to not miss any
>> key information?
>> Or should we just operate in the fashion of cross-posting to both lists if
>> it's relevant to both audiences - that requires extra effort and ensures
>> everybody receives the message but then it does dilute the discussion as
>> input given on @user wouldn't be seen by @Dev <dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> CC'ing ComDev too because they probably have some good suggestions based on
>> on other projects. However our community might be distinct in that we have
>> a larger user-facing community than most more
>> technical/infrastructure-oriented Apache projects.
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Myrle Krantz <myrle@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:41 PM
>> Subject: Escalation guide for project issues
>> To: dev <dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Hey all,
>> An escalation guide for Apache issues was just posted on
>> dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. I wanted to make sure our community was
>> aware of this as well:
>> In general, I invite you to discuss problems you see with the Fineract
>> project. Discussion should be done openly, on the
>> dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx list, or, in some cases,
>> private@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Addressing problems early and openly
>> will keep most problems from becoming too large to handle.
>> Best Regards,
>> Committer, Apache Fineract
>> *Ed Cable*
>> President/CEO, Mifos Initiative
>> edcable@xxxxxxxxx | Skype: edcable | Mobile: +1.484.477.8649
>> *Collectively Creating a World of 3 Billion Maries | *http://mifos.org
>> <http://facebook.com/mifos> <http://www.twitter.com/mifos>