From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jim Raden" Subject: Re: The 8th airing of the msysGit herald Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 21:03:27 -0500 Message-ID: <5fc54b450803051803t4dda4341ue3ac403c742f1903@mail.gmail.com> References: <200803030210.02223.jnareb@gmail.com> <47CBE85B.6060702@imap.cc> <7vablfiv42.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <47CC432B.8060502@imap.cc> <7v1w6rh1ru.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <46a038f90803031458t2b404212t10f6e9ae710dc408@mail.gmail.com> <47CF2F61.5060208@imap.cc> <7vskz4heeg.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Reply-To: james.raden@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_8322_4597575.1204769007789" Cc: "Johannes Schindelin" , "Tilman Schmidt" , "Martin Langhoff" , "Jakub Narebski" , msysgit@googlegroups.com, git@vger.kernel.org To: "Junio C Hamano" X-From: grbounce-SUPTvwUAAABqUyiVh9Fi-Slj5a_0adWQ=gcvm-msysgit=m.gmane.org@googlegroups.com Thu Mar 06 03:04:12 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvm-msysgit@m.gmane.org Received: from wa-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.146.243]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JX5Sp-0004Yf-04 for gcvm-msysgit@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Mar 2008 03:04:07 +0100 Received: by wa-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id n36so6079213wag.21 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:03:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:x-sender:x-apparently-to:received:received:received-spf:authentication-results:received:dkim-signature:domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:reply-to:sender:precedence:x-google-loop:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-unsubscribe; bh=mjNNQL64qrxedAqYkFGG9eHpWkRoaFQQPuJrjG85s14=; b=nBCToYNhH79bMD5NLXcrXgf7cBdB3UiDhkU+dcLh1iDH98+AOHEjS44hBiNQ6PnrqlEAbJywrKBBUvp8cqC+Jn8Ux4qm5njiVRDZPChqxoK4hbqG/fu32KQH/RL4y/tr8szbsnRLZr3wpg4hVoXAp4EzKTwoAjl7T9bVNLSVFDQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-sender:x-apparently-to:received-spf:authentication-results:dkim-signature:domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:reply-to:sender:precedence:x-google-loop:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-unsubscribe; b=3X6uzhs8pmy7FmxptXCgEtO2G/kxwL+7wFxlRHp/rku4YV97JPpcKLi1ZybTW3wxIIX5Mc9EmGWfj9Ntz8Mkk8DXas4+EqvUHqBInv7Vc+Ir6gJxjf6FjpjaNCg6GWWP6BDJ2CLcN7JisJKJ83ys5VZLhdyI09QBMQFFNpfahQo= Received: by 10.114.25.3 with SMTP id 3mr162769way.22.1204769009826; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:03:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.106.191.30 with SMTP id o30gr1919prf.0; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:03:29 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: james.raden@gmail.com X-Apparently-To: msysgit@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.114.58.1 with SMTP id g1mr1662186waa.8.1204769008841; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:03:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com (rn-out-0910.google.com [64.233.170.186]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v36si5221792wah.3.2008.03.05.18.03.28; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:03:28 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of james.raden@gmail.com designates 64.233.170.186 as permitted sender) client-ip=64.233.170.186; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of james.raden@gmail.com designates 64.233.170.186 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=james.raden@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id s28so742615rnb.20 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:03:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=IaDYN72fMuHm2yOLEqeULl8/pk3YBPuO9vK+/60thKk=; b=LxQ/cEZtLNkNb8ciF5AVYMzO1xjrP6aeTH54SxjsVoRxUaEcJDajoe5L8DqScpHt4uWxd3rFQZ9Id/VvgY9mN4Cm/wOJVkdv548e1MqamlYeFU0zE/AvLdYIudPuYWEEaABPCiLWqBIJDM2TMaAgSIDHDQMkHENgNb+0tIXCp88= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=NiUbEHuggQfJnnrch5eOP/s+kkFLVesaWlSkSoOkUze/27ilSky1lQYvWuZp2EHQS0oHhocAjyeu4anVp4QxO+1I/H+/Hg+ipVp/2y8ddW35+sOGlZH+BHK9PdYnyDO1LaPmx4+PjqiLeEBI8yO3UwibjwEgWs5wcVURctZznVg= Received: by 10.115.58.1 with SMTP id l1mr5806284wak.110.1204769007795; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:03:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.198.3 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:03:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7vskz4heeg.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: msysgit@googlegroups.com Precedence: bulk X-Google-Loop: groups Mailing-List: list msysgit@googlegroups.com; contact msysgit-owner@googlegroups.com List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: , Archived-At: ------=_Part_8322_4597575.1204769007789 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Perhaps adopting a convention for the subject line, like "Usage question: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"? We're still a small list, so it wouldn't be horribly cumbersome. If the list grew beyond 150 or soactive users, or if the signal:noise ratio grew too low, perhaps then that would be a good time to readdress the issue. I confess that I haven't had to deal with such things before, so I'm not familiar with the practices that may work in other groups faced with a similar issue. On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 7:41 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Tilman Schmidt wrote: > > > >> would it be possible to have separate mailing lists for usage topics > and > >> for discussions of ongoing development? I imagine that might help those > >> who just want to use git (like me) to find their way around. > > > > AFAIAC you can have your "users-only" mailing list. Personally, I will > > never look at it, though, since all I am interested in is the > development > > of Git. If that holds true for the majority of Git _developers_, it > might > > even be a bad idea to have a separate users' list, since then > > > > - no ideas from strictly-users would flow to the developers, and > > > > - new developments would not reach you, and > > > > - you would not get help by the people knowing the internals _deeply_. > > Personally, I suspect I would end up subscribing to both, but > two mailing lists would make it much more cumbersome than > necessary to correlate the original user "itch" request that > triggered an enhancement, the discussion that clarified the > design constraints and requirements, and the patch and the > review comments that lead to the final implementation, > especially if you do not encourage cross posting to both lists. > And of course cross posting will make user-only list more > technical which would defeat the original point of having two > lists. > > "users-only" list could probably created by readers' MUA, by > picking emails that do not have "diff --git" in its body; that > would probably be a good enough approximation for people who are > not interested in the technical discussions. > ------=_Part_8322_4597575.1204769007789 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Perhaps adopting a convention for the subject line, like "Usage question: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"? We're still a small list, so it wouldn't be horribly cumbersome. If the list grew beyond 150 or so active users, or if the signal:noise ratio grew too low, perhaps then that would be a good time to readdress the issue.

I confess that I haven't had to deal with such things before, so I'm not familiar with the practices that may work in other groups faced with a similar issue.

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 7:41 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>
>> would it be possible to have separate mailing lists for usage topics and
>> for discussions of ongoing development? I imagine that might help those
>> who just want to use git (like me) to find their way around.
>
> AFAIAC you can have your "users-only" mailing list.  Personally, I will
> never look at it, though, since all I am interested in is the development
> of Git.  If that holds true for the majority of Git _developers_, it might
> even be a bad idea to have a separate users' list, since then
>
> - no ideas from strictly-users would flow to the developers, and
>
> - new developments would not reach you, and
>
> - you would not get help by the people knowing the internals _deeply_.

Personally, I suspect I would end up subscribing to both, but
two mailing lists would make it much more cumbersome than
necessary to correlate the original user "itch" request that
triggered an enhancement, the discussion that clarified the
design constraints and requirements, and the patch and the
review comments that lead to the final implementation,
especially if you do not encourage cross posting to both lists.
And of course cross posting will make user-only list more
technical which would defeat the original point of having two
lists.

"users-only" list could probably created by readers' MUA, by
picking emails that do not have "diff --git" in its body; that
would probably be a good enough approximation for people who are
not interested in the technical discussions.

------=_Part_8322_4597575.1204769007789--