Sure, makes sense to me. Cheers, Chris
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -----Original Message----- From: Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 4:08 PM To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Aurora for Incubation >Hi Marvin, Dave, > >+1 for dev@, private@ and commits@ lists for start. > >If Aurora picks up more clients as "user" which making dev@ list too noisy >we could always request for user@ list. > >- Henry > > >On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Marvin Humphrey ><mar...@rectangular.com>wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Dave Lester <d...@ischool.berkeley.edu> >> wrote: >> > We recommended an aurora-user list because Aurora is currently >> > production-ready and used by Twitter. We anticipate that once we have >>an >> > initial release in the Incubator, it will be straightforward to for >> current >> > Mesos users to begin using Aurora. Development discussion would still >> made >> > on aurora-dev. How does that sound? >> >> See <http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/MailingListOptions>. >> >> For small-ish projects, we recommend that user traffic be shunted onto >>the >> dev >> list at first because we have observed that great new contributors tend >>to >> emerge from the pool of highly engaged users. You want to foster >> conversations which flow seemlessly from "how do I do this" to "how do I >> implement this" to "welcome new committer so-and-so". Breaking out a >> separate >> user@ list is not generally desirable until the project has hit critical >> mass >> and dev list traffic is high. >> >> Community growth is a difficult problem that is central to the Apache >> mission, >> and it will be an important challenge for the proposed Aurora podling >>since >> all the initial contributors work for the same company (Twitter). It >>will >> be >> tempting to make architectural decisions in private for the sake of >> efficiency, but doing so will stunt the project's growth. It's >>important >> to >> hold project discussions out in the open where as many people as >>possible >> can >> witness them and potentially jump in. >> >> The issues/notifications/ci list is a different story. Making the dev >> list a >> good read with a high signal-to-noise ratio is a good recruitment >>tactic. >> There are often people who are interested in high-level development >> conversations and user discussions but who get annoyed by CI spam and >>issue >> tracker trivialities. >> >> In my opinion, it would be fruitful to start off with just dev@, >>private@and >> commits@ lists; discuss adding a notifications@ list as one of the first >> community decisions you make on your dev@ list; and perhaps add a >>user@list >> later when the time is ripe. However, all of these decisions are >> ultimately >> up to the community; us Incubator denizens are just providing the best >> guidance we can based on what seems to have worked in the past. >> >> Marvin Humphrey >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
