Hi Ron,
On 01/17/2014 02:56 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote:
Mailing lists are good for problem resolution but are difficult to use for
discussions that take place over time.
I have to disagree with you on this. It really depends on what you trying to
achieve.
Of course discussions on like LinkedIn can go much faster (and probably easier
as well), but the problem is that it doesn't work well (and actually not at all
for LinkedIn) to serve the whole of the community, and certainly not over time.
Using LinkedIn cuts off the community members who are not a LinkedIn member
(now) and certainly future community members who come looking for information
either through the mailing list archives or public search indexes.
So, while using LinkedIn might be more 'convenient' to some right now (and to be
clear: I'm not disagreeing on that), it doesn't align with the general Apache
policies concerning how to interact with and serve the community.
Having discussions on a mailing list might seem difficult to you.
But really: this is the common way ALL Apache project communities communicate.
And how they are *supposed* to communicate: through the mailing list.
This is not something optional, its one of the core ASF principles!
Of course you can organize project discussions outside of the mailing list with
selected people if you so desire. But you're stepping out of the project
community when doing so.
That might not even be a serious issue, depending on the topic and information
shared back.
But if it concerns something (like in this case) the project *roadmap*, and you
explicitly ask people to go 'offline' and discuss this on LinkedIn *instead* of
discussing this on the mailing list, I really think this is a bad sign.
Note: there isn't necessarily something wrong with temporary 'offline'
discussions as long those discussions are properly recorded and reported back on
the list.
This is what some other ASF projects do as well, like using Hangout or f2f
meetings, but they always (should) report back to the list, often with a full
transcript of what was said/discussed/concluded.
Still, a major topic like discussing the roadmap doesn't seem fit to me for such
an 'offline' discussion.
The polling methods in lists are really unsatisfactory.
Well, AFAIK the poll you created for the proposed roadmap really isn't much more
than a typical 'VOTE' thread as we are common to have at ASF mailing lists.
And actually, I'd prefer doing this through a mailing list VOTE thread as I can
add concrete feedback on my vote 'inline' with my answer.
I can't do such thing with the LinkedIn poll.
Jetspeed is a project that has had a great deal of difficulty in building a
community and I hope that this helps find all of the people that have an
interest in Jetspeed and get a bit of community involvement.
LinkedIn is a pretty popular and free spot for business-oriented people to meet.
Like I said before, I think its fine (and even great) to have the LinkedIn
Jetspeed group. No problem there.
My problem is when it starts getting used to pull the community *away* from
Apache.
I think that you will find that many Apache projects have an active LinkedIn
group (Maven, Cloudstack, Wicket, JMeter. Mahoot, etc.)
Sure. And they might have or should have similar concerns.
Or maybe/likely they don't have them.
The active Jetspeed community is *so* small, that you easily can 'break' it
further by pulling people over to LinkedIn only.
I don't think the above mentioned projects are in the same boat, or at least
also have enough vibrant Apache community mailing list activity to prevent such
problems.
I share your concern for the "Official Record" status of the developer list but
I am not sure if this matters a lot on the user list side.
I would agree if the user list and developer list would be largely separate
groups.
But right now I think there hardly is much difference anymore between them
because the whole of the community is so small and AFAIK everyone (active) on
the user list is also subscribed to the developer list and visa versa.
IMO in the current situation it might actually be better to merge these lists
and only have a developer list...
I hope that the LinkedIn list will encourage discussions about how Jetspeed is
being used and what is needed to make it more competitive with alternatives.
Sure, and I'm fine with that!
But don't you agree this type of information should (also) flow back to the user
list? Its not like everyone on the Jetspeed user list is member of the Jetspeed
LinkedIn group (by far).
But note that even when the outcome of such discussions at LinkedIn would be
reported back to this list, the discussion already is 'done and over'.
So other community members who are not part of the LinkedIn discussion are
confronted with only the end result, might feel it being too late to chime in
after the fact.
This is hard to do in a mailing list since the individual transactions are
transient and it is hard to follow a discussion that takes place over many days
or weeks.
That might be, if the mailing list was very much active, with many concurrent
running discussions. But that isn't really the case, is it?
On LinkedIn each discussion thread is available while you are adding your
comment so people can join in late and quickly read the previous comments,
You can also "like" comments that others have posted and that becomes part of
the permanent record.
Well, permanent at LinkedIn only, and only available to those signed in.
It is also easy to check out the person making the comment which can be helpful
in understanding their contribution or point of view.
Helpful for sure. But should it be a requirement?
I hope that the project committers will become more active in promoting the
project and actively work at communicating with the community through
discussions and polls on LinkedIn.
Well, I'm not really active in the project for quite a while so I shouldn't be
regarded as an example, but if and when I'm participating, I will only do so
here on the mailing list.
And to be clear: that is independent from this specific project or my currently
inactive role.
I'm active in other ASF projects and I'll stick to participating only on their
respective mailing lists because that is how the ASF works and works well that way.
I hope that the use community will become more active by discussing success
stories, use cases and sharing ideas for shared portlets.
I hope so too, and please do this (also) here on the community mailing lists.
Regards, Ate
Ron
//
On 17/01/2014 6:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
On 01/17/2014 06:38 AM, Ron Wheeler wrote:
I have created a poll in the Jetspeed Portal group on LinkedIn to confirm the
acceptability of the Jetspeed Roadmap.
Please visit http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Jetspeed-Portal-3347198 and let
David know whether you support the roadmap or have some topics that you want
considered.
If you do not vote for the Roadmap, please add a comment to the Roadmap
discussion at
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Jetspeed-Road-Map-2014-3347198.S.5828949445881905155
describing your concerns.
<ASF member hat on>
While I think it is great to see the roadmap being discussed, I *strongly*
disagree with this happening outside the Jetspeed mailing list(s).
I don't think there is anything wrong with the LinkedIn group, but it
shouldn't replace the community participation here.
An important 'rule' at Apache is:
"if it didn't happen on the list, it didn't happen at all"
So, anything which is discussed (and maybe even decided) externally (LinkedIn,
Skype, f2f, whatever) which would be of importance to this community should be
(also) reported/mirrored on the list.
Also note that the ASF mailing lists are archived (for ever) so even future
community members can review and find back old arguments, discussions, choices
made. Using external 'sources' like LinkedIn groups or whatever, cuts out both
current *and* future community members.
</ASF member hat off>
Ron, please don't take my remarks above as critique on *what* you are trying
to do. I really think it is great you're trying to renew the community.
My remark only concerns the *how*.
Kind regards, Ate
Show some love!
Ron
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
