I'd like to collect feedback on a new mailing list and forum structure on
Orocos.org.
We would only provide 3 lists:
[Orocos] : very low traffic, announcements of all libraries and front-page
news.
[Orocos-users] : medium traffic for RTT,BFL,KDL,OCL,... users
[Orocos-dev] : medium/high traffic for Bugzilla reports, core developers
of these libraries.
The same layout would be used on the orocos.org forum.
This means the BFL mailinglist would disappear. The idea is that users
and developers accross projects can learn from each other and to promote
the integration of the projects. Providing each project with a separate
users/dev/announce list would result in 12 lists which would all be very low
traffic. The projects are too small to justify individual lists. Note that
currently, KDL, RTT and OCL are already discussed on one list (orocos-dev),
however, users and developers are mixed.
Any flames ?
Peter
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Peter Soetens wrote:
> I'd like to collect feedback on a new mailing list and forum structure on
> Orocos.org.
>
> We would only provide 3 lists:
>
> [Orocos] : very low traffic, announcements of all libraries and front-page
> news.
> [Orocos-users] : medium traffic for RTT,BFL,KDL,OCL,... users
> [Orocos-dev] : medium/high traffic for Bugzilla reports, core developers
> of these libraries.
>
> The same layout would be used on the orocos.org forum.
>
> This means the BFL mailinglist would disappear. The idea is that users
> and developers accross projects can learn from each other and to promote
> the integration of the projects. Providing each project with a separate
> users/dev/announce list would result in 12 lists which would all be very low
> traffic. The projects are too small to justify individual lists. Note that
> currently, KDL, RTT and OCL are already discussed on one list (orocos-dev),
> however, users and developers are mixed.
>
> Any flames ?
I follow your reasoning, but what's wrong with a low-traffic mailinglist?
(I would only go for individual "dev" mailinglists anyway.)
I think many people prefer this over a mailinglist with a lot of traffic,
but with mostly messages related to projects they are not interested in.
Herman
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
>I follow your reasoning, but what's wrong with a low-traffic mailinglist?
>(I would only go for individual "dev" mailinglists anyway.)
>I think many people prefer this over a mailinglist with a lot of traffic,
>but with mostly messages related to projects they are not interested in.
>Herman
I'm in favour of the proposal of Herman to have individual "dev" mailinglists but a shared orocos-user mailinglist.
From the point of view of the BFL developers it would be a lot of overhead to get all the dev-mails from rtt, ... if only one dev mailingslist would be used.
Tinne
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Peter Soetens wrote:
> I'd like to collect feedback on a new mailing list and forum structure on
> Orocos.org.
>
> We would only provide 3 lists:
>
> [Orocos] : very low traffic, announcements of all libraries and front-page
> news.
> [Orocos-users] : medium traffic for RTT,BFL,KDL,OCL,... users
> [Orocos-dev] : medium/high traffic for Bugzilla reports, core developers
> of these libraries.
>
> The same layout would be used on the orocos.org forum.
>
> This means the BFL mailinglist would disappear. The idea is that users
> and developers accross projects can learn from each other and to promote
> the integration of the projects. Providing each project with a separate
> users/dev/announce list would result in 12 lists which would all be very low
> traffic. The projects are too small to justify individual lists. Note that
> currently, KDL, RTT and OCL are already discussed on one list (orocos-dev),
> however, users and developers are mixed.
>
> Any flames ?
I follow your reasoning, but what's wrong with a low-traffic mailinglist?
(I would only go for individual "dev" mailinglists anyway.)
I think many people prefer this over a mailinglist with a lot of traffic,
but with mostly messages related to projects they are not interested in.
Herman
_______________________________________________
I hereby promise not to top-post on the
BFL mailing list
BFL [..] ...
http://lists.mech.kuleuven.be/mailman/listinfo/bfl
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
On Tuesday 24 April 2007 14:53:21 Herman Bruyninckx wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Peter Soetens wrote:
> > I'd like to collect feedback on a new mailing list and forum structure on
> > Orocos.org.
> >
> > We would only provide 3 lists:
> >
> > [Orocos] : very low traffic, announcements of all libraries and
> > front-page news.
> > [Orocos-users] : medium traffic for RTT,BFL,KDL,OCL,... users
> > [Orocos-dev] : medium/high traffic for Bugzilla reports, core developers
> I follow your reasoning, but what's wrong with a low-traffic mailinglist?
> (I would only go for individual "dev" mailinglists anyway.)
> I think many people prefer this over a mailinglist with a lot of traffic,
> but with mostly messages related to projects they are not interested in.
Some thoughts:
- Creating a separate user/dev mailinglist for each Orocos project (RTT, KDL,
BFL, OCL) results in at least 8 mailiinglists, which might be confusing for
many users.
- All Orocos projects are integrated, and many applications use multiple
Orocos projects simultaneously. Therefore it will not always be clear which
mailinglist to contact about a problem.
- Do we create another mailinglist for general Orocos related issues? Then
we'll have even more mailinglists
- Not many people like the huge amounts of traffic of the orocos-dev
mailinglist, but they might still be interested to follow what happens in the
Orocos community. Therefore we need a 'medium traffic' mailinglist like
orocos-users (with medium traffic: based on the current traffic this is +-5
emails per week).
- Using an Orocos-users mailinglist 'advertises' all Orocos projects to our
users, and emphasizes the integration between the Orocos projects.
Wim
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Wim Meeussen wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 April 2007 14:53:21 Herman Bruyninckx wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>> I'd like to collect feedback on a new mailing list and forum structure on
>>> Orocos.org.
>>>
>>> We would only provide 3 lists:
>>>
>>> [Orocos] : very low traffic, announcements of all libraries and
>>> front-page news.
>>> [Orocos-users] : medium traffic for RTT,BFL,KDL,OCL,... users
>>> [Orocos-dev] : medium/high traffic for Bugzilla reports, core developers
>
>> I follow your reasoning, but what's wrong with a low-traffic mailinglist?
>> (I would only go for individual "dev" mailinglists anyway.)
>> I think many people prefer this over a mailinglist with a lot of traffic,
>> but with mostly messages related to projects they are not interested in.
>
>
> Some thoughts:
> - Creating a separate user/dev mailinglist for each Orocos project (RTT, KDL,
> BFL, OCL) results in at least 8 mailiinglists, which might be confusing for
> many users.
I suggest just _one_ project-specific mailinglist: "dev".
> - All Orocos projects are integrated, and many applications use multiple
> Orocos projects simultaneously. Therefore it will not always be clear which
> mailinglist to contact about a problem.
Being "integrated" is something _very_ different from being "similar so
confusing"! Do you really think someone interested in Kalman Filters will
be tempted in using the RTT mailinglist...??? And we have "OCL" as a
separate project where the integration takes place. It's difficult to get
much clearer, can we?
> - Do we create another mailinglist for general Orocos related issues? Then
> we'll have even more mailinglists
"orocos" serves this purpose very well. (And is almost never used.)
> - Not many people like the huge amounts of traffic of the orocos-dev
> mailinglist, but they might still be interested to follow what happens in the
> Orocos community. Therefore we need a 'medium traffic' mailinglist like
> orocos-users (with medium traffic: based on the current traffic this is +-5
> emails per week).
I haven't seen _any_ message on the mailinglist(s) asking for such a new
list. Did you...?
> - Using an Orocos-users mailinglist 'advertises' all Orocos projects to our
> users, and emphasizes the integration between the Orocos projects.
"orocos" is already doing that...
Herman
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
> > Some thoughts:
> > - Creating a separate user/dev mailinglist for each Orocos project (RTT,
> > KDL, BFL, OCL) results in at least 8 mailiinglists, which might be
> > confusing for many users.
> I suggest just _one_ project-specific mailinglist: "dev".
So you suggest 5 lists: Orocos, RTT-dev, KDL-dev, BFL-dev and OCL-dev?
> And we have "OCL" as a
> separate project where the integration takes place. It's difficult to get
> much clearer, can we?
OCL is a library of Orocos components. The OCL mailinglist is a place to ask
questions about this library, but not about your own application.
> > - Not many people like the huge amounts of traffic of the orocos-dev
> > mailinglist, but they might still be interested to follow what happens in
> > the Orocos community. Therefore we need a 'medium traffic' mailinglist
> > like orocos-users (with medium traffic: based on the current traffic this
> > is +-5 emails per week).
>
> I haven't seen _any_ message on the mailinglist(s) asking for such a new
> list. Did you...?
The head of this thread? :-) I'm afraind most users will unsubscribe instead
of post a message asking for a new maillinglist.
> > - Using an Orocos-users mailinglist 'advertises' all Orocos projects to
> > our users, and emphasizes the integration between the Orocos projects.
>
> "orocos" is already doing that...
true...
Wim
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Wim Meeussen wrote:
>>> Some thoughts:
>>> - Creating a separate user/dev mailinglist for each Orocos project (RTT,
>>> KDL, BFL, OCL) results in at least 8 mailiinglists, which might be
>>> confusing for many users.
>
>> I suggest just _one_ project-specific mailinglist: "dev".
>
> So you suggest 5 lists: Orocos, RTT-dev, KDL-dev, BFL-dev and OCL-dev?
Yes.
>> And we have "OCL" as a
>> separate project where the integration takes place. It's difficult to get
>> much clearer, can we?
>
> OCL is a library of Orocos components. The OCL mailinglist is a place to ask
> questions about this library, but not about your own application.
OCL _is_ about applications! And, more in particular, on how to find common
ground between different applications. OCL is _the_ place for
inter-application discussions, and for _architectures_. So, it should _not_
be just a library...
>>> - Not many people like the huge amounts of traffic of the orocos-dev
>>> mailinglist, but they might still be interested to follow what happens in
>>> the Orocos community. Therefore we need a 'medium traffic' mailinglist
>>> like orocos-users (with medium traffic: based on the current traffic this
>>> is +-5 emails per week).
>>
>> I haven't seen _any_ message on the mailinglist(s) asking for such a new
>> list. Did you...?
>
> The head of this thread? :-) I'm afraind most users will unsubscribe instead
> of post a message asking for a new maillinglist.
Lurkers might, interested users won't.
Herman
Tel: +32 16 322480
--
K.U.Leuven, Mechanical Eng., Mechatronics & Robotics Research Group
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
Quoting Herman Bruyninckx <Herman [dot] Bruyninckx [..] ...>:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Wim Meeussen wrote:
>
>>>> Some thoughts:
>>>> - Creating a separate user/dev mailinglist for each Orocos project (RTT,
>>>> KDL, BFL, OCL) results in at least 8 mailiinglists, which might be
>>>> confusing for many users.
>>
>>> I suggest just _one_ project-specific mailinglist: "dev".
>>
>> So you suggest 5 lists: Orocos, RTT-dev, KDL-dev, BFL-dev and OCL-dev?
>
> Yes.
If one thing seemed clear to me, it is that all developers belong on
the same list. Today, the core developers are all subscribing to the
same lists, discussing technical/bugzilla matters, which go beyond
common user interest. They could do this on just one list: [orocos-dev].
Now for a user, he wants to be in contact with developers, but not be
listening constantly to their yammering. He'd rather hear yammering of
other users and learn about common problems before he hits them.
Filtering this information out of the orocos-dev list is very hard (not
a single user has entered this discussion, which means we have no users
or proves my point).
So the real question was: do we set up a user list for each subproject
(to which users *and* developers subscribe), in between the [orocos]
and [orocos-dev] lists or just one big [orocos-users] list ? Given the
current user traffic, it seemed overkill to create a list for each
subproject and hence, the idea of [orocos-users] was born.
This is not different in other projects. Boost has 50+ libraries
ranging from math over template meta programming to networking. Yet
they have two lists: boost and boost-users. The Linux kernel mailing
list discusses anything from device drivers to network stacks or (gasp)
real-time threading, yet, all these core people reside on one list,
learning, cross-fertilizing on the same -dev list.
The day that KDL users, BFL users or any other project's users flood
the orocos-users list (not this year), it may be worthwile
reconsidering our options.
>>>
>>> I haven't seen _any_ message on the mailinglist(s) asking for such a new
>>> list. Did you...?
>>
>> The head of this thread? :-) I'm afraind most users will unsubscribe instead
>> of post a message asking for a new maillinglist.
> Lurkers might, interested users won't.
Lurkers and occasional visitors have the web-page's forum. Interested
users can learn from the -users list.
Peter
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Peter Soetens wrote:
[...]
> This is not different in other projects. Boost has 50+ libraries ranging from
> math over template meta programming to networking. Yet they have two lists:
> boost and boost-users. The Linux kernel mailing list discusses anything from
> device drivers to network stacks or (gasp) real-time threading, yet, all
> these core people reside on one list, learning, cross-fertilizing on the same
> -dev list.
These projects indeed _do_ have users, we don't...
And the number 1 lesson in open source is: "listen to your users!" I
haven't heard any user speaking up yet...?
Herman
Proposal for re-arranging mailing lists
On Wednesday 25 April 2007 08:25:31 Herman Bruyninckx wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Peter Soetens wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > This is not different in other projects. Boost has 50+ libraries ranging
> > from math over template meta programming to networking. Yet they have two
> > lists: boost and boost-users. The Linux kernel mailing list discusses
> > anything from device drivers to network stacks or (gasp) real-time
> > threading, yet, all these core people reside on one list, learning,
> > cross-fertilizing on the same -dev list.
>
> These projects indeed _do_ have users, we don't...
>
> And the number 1 lesson in open source is: "listen to your users!" I
> haven't heard any user speaking up yet...?
I don't see where the above arguments are going. If you want to count users,
the solution is easy: create an [orocos-users] list, announce this on
[Orocos-Dev],[BFL] and [Orocos] and count how many people subscribe.
In retrospect, Orocos-Dev was a 'users' list in the past, before I started the
Bugzilla reports on that list. It was a good idea for developers, bad news for
users. Give them back their 'old' list and announce it. Let them vote with
their subscription.
Peter