Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Patrick Boettcher]

Hi Mauro,

Since the creation of linux-media@vger.kernel.org I'm seeing lots of 
cross-postings between linux-dvb, linux-media and video4linux. This is a 
little bit annoying if you are subscribed to all of those lists.

Worse is, that some people only send requests to linux-media. Like that 
linux-dvb-only subscribers can't help...

Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the currently 
subscribed users to linux-media automatically?

regards,
Patrick.

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Hans Verkuil]

On Friday 16 January 2009 15:48:45 Patrick Boettcher wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
>
> Since the creation of linux-media@vger.kernel.org I'm seeing lots of
> cross-postings between linux-dvb, linux-media and video4linux. This
> is a little bit annoying if you are subscribed to all of those lists.
>
> Worse is, that some people only send requests to linux-media. Like
> that linux-dvb-only subscribers can't help...
>
> Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the
> currently subscribed users to linux-media automatically?

I agree with Patrick. I suggest a daily automatic posting to linux-dvb 
and video4linux telling people that on February 1st these lists 
disappear and that they should use linux-media instead. Then they can 
be closed down at the end of the month. I definitely wouldn't wait any 
longer since it is rather messy right now. One month transition period 
seems reasonable to me.

Regards,

	Hans

-- 
Hans Verkuil - video4linux developer - sponsored by TANDBERG

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mike Isely]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Hans Verkuil wrote:

> On Friday 16 January 2009 15:48:45 Patrick Boettcher wrote:
> > Hi Mauro,
> >
> > Since the creation of linux-media@vger.kernel.org I'm seeing lots of
> > cross-postings between linux-dvb, linux-media and video4linux. This
> > is a little bit annoying if you are subscribed to all of those lists.
> >
> > Worse is, that some people only send requests to linux-media. Like
> > that linux-dvb-only subscribers can't help...
> >
> > Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the
> > currently subscribed users to linux-media automatically?
> 
> I agree with Patrick. I suggest a daily automatic posting to linux-dvb 
> and video4linux telling people that on February 1st these lists 
> disappear and that they should use linux-media instead. Then they can 
> be closed down at the end of the month. I definitely wouldn't wait any 
> longer since it is rather messy right now. One month transition period 
> seems reasonable to me.
> 

Amen to that.  I've been telling people to go over to linux-media, but 
old habits are hard to break.  It's time to actually make a clean break 
from the old lists.

  -Mike


-- 

Mike Isely
isely @ pobox (dot) com
PGP: 03 54 43 4D 75 E5 CC 92 71 16 01 E2 B5 F5 C1 E8

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Benny Amorsen]

Mike Isely <isely@isely.net> writes:

> Amen to that.  I've been telling people to go over to linux-media, but 
> old habits are hard to break.  It's time to actually make a clean break 
> from the old lists.

Is linux-media available on gmane?


/Benny

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Luca Tettamanti]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet@amorsen.dk> wrote:
> Mike Isely <isely@isely.net> writes:
>
>> Amen to that.  I've been telling people to go over to linux-media, but
>> old habits are hard to break.  It's time to actually make a clean break
>> from the old lists.
>
> Is linux-media available on gmane?

Yup, here it is:
http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.video-input-infrastructure

and also:
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@vger.kernel.org/

Luca

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Rick]

In article <68676e00901160808k47d51344w3e6783271625b91d@mail.gmail.com>,
Luca Tettamanti <kronos.it@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Is linux-media available on gmane?

>Yup, here it is:
>http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.video-input-infrastructure
>
>and also:
>http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@vger.kernel.org/

You can also get an RSS feed:

http://feeds2.feedburner.com/LinuxMedia

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Lars Hanisch]

Mike Isely wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> 
>> On Friday 16 January 2009 15:48:45 Patrick Boettcher wrote:
>>> Hi Mauro,
>>>
>>> Since the creation of linux-media@vger.kernel.org I'm seeing lots of
>>> cross-postings between linux-dvb, linux-media and video4linux. This
>>> is a little bit annoying if you are subscribed to all of those lists.
>>>
>>> Worse is, that some people only send requests to linux-media. Like
>>> that linux-dvb-only subscribers can't help...
>>>
>>> Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the
>>> currently subscribed users to linux-media automatically?
>> I agree with Patrick. I suggest a daily automatic posting to linux-dvb 
>> and video4linux telling people that on February 1st these lists 
>> disappear and that they should use linux-media instead. Then they can 
>> be closed down at the end of the month. I definitely wouldn't wait any 
>> longer since it is rather messy right now. One month transition period 
>> seems reasonable to me.
>>
> 
> Amen to that.  I've been telling people to go over to linux-media, but 
> old habits are hard to break.  It's time to actually make a clean break 
> from the old lists.

  +1 from me

  Although I'm not an active developer (I'm just an interested user), 
reading the lists at the moment is hard...

Lars.

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:13:26 +0100
Lars Hanisch <dvb@cinnamon-sage.de> wrote:

> Mike Isely wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> > 
> >> On Friday 16 January 2009 15:48:45 Patrick Boettcher wrote:
> >>> Hi Mauro,
> >>>
> >>> Since the creation of linux-media@vger.kernel.org I'm seeing lots of
> >>> cross-postings between linux-dvb, linux-media and video4linux. This
> >>> is a little bit annoying if you are subscribed to all of those lists.
> >>>
> >>> Worse is, that some people only send requests to linux-media. Like
> >>> that linux-dvb-only subscribers can't help...
> >>>
> >>> Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the
> >>> currently subscribed users to linux-media automatically?
> >> I agree with Patrick. I suggest a daily automatic posting to linux-dvb 
> >> and video4linux telling people that on February 1st these lists 
> >> disappear and that they should use linux-media instead. Then they can 
> >> be closed down at the end of the month. I definitely wouldn't wait any 
> >> longer since it is rather messy right now. One month transition period 
> >> seems reasonable to me.
> >>
> > 
> > Amen to that.  I've been telling people to go over to linux-media, but 
> > old habits are hard to break.  It's time to actually make a clean break 
> > from the old lists.
> 
>   +1 from me
> 
>   Although I'm not an active developer (I'm just an interested user), 
> reading the lists at the moment is hard...

Instead of just removing the ML, maybe the better is to change the reply to to
linux-media and send an autoreply message to the sender.
> 
> Lars.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




Cheers,
Mauro

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:59:12 -0200
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:

> Instead of just removing the ML, maybe the better is to change the reply to to
> linux-media and send an autoreply message to the sender.

Done. Any posts to linux-dvb will receive this message:

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:59:48 +0100
linux-dvb-bounces@linuxtv.org wrote:

> This ML is deprecated. Please use linux-media@vger.kernel.org instead.
> For more info about linux-media@vger.kernel.org, please read:
> http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#linux-media




Cheers,
Mauro



Cheers,
Mauro

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Bob Cunningham]

Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:13:26 +0100
> Lars Hanisch <dvb@cinnamon-sage.de> wrote:
> 
>> Mike Isely wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday 16 January 2009 15:48:45 Patrick Boettcher wrote:
>>>>> Hi Mauro,
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the creation of linux-media@vger.kernel.org I'm seeing lots of
>>>>> cross-postings between linux-dvb, linux-media and video4linux. This
>>>>> is a little bit annoying if you are subscribed to all of those lists.
>>>>>
>>>>> Worse is, that some people only send requests to linux-media. Like
>>>>> that linux-dvb-only subscribers can't help...
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the
>>>>> currently subscribed users to linux-media automatically?
>>>> I agree with Patrick. I suggest a daily automatic posting to linux-dvb 
>>>> and video4linux telling people that on February 1st these lists 
>>>> disappear and that they should use linux-media instead. Then they can 
>>>> be closed down at the end of the month. I definitely wouldn't wait any 
>>>> longer since it is rather messy right now. One month transition period 
>>>> seems reasonable to me.
>>>>
>>> Amen to that.  I've been telling people to go over to linux-media, but 
>>> old habits are hard to break.  It's time to actually make a clean break 
>>> from the old lists.
>>   +1 from me
>>
>>   Although I'm not an active developer (I'm just an interested user), 
>> reading the lists at the moment is hard...
> 
> Instead of just removing the ML, maybe the better is to change the reply to to
> linux-media and send an autoreply message to the sender.
>> Lars.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mauro

Reasons I'd like to keep both lists going:  

1. My subscription requests to linux-media have yielded nothing.  Anything broken with the approval process?

2. I agree with another poster: I only care about broadcast and cable video, both analog and digital.  I eventually hope to help get my "AnyTV AUTV002 USB ATSC/QAM Tuner Stick" supported by V4L, and then use it in a MythTV system.  I'd prefer a list that focuses on such devices and systems, if possible.  Which seems to match the mission of linux-dvb!

The general issue of multi-posting seems typical of list forking/merging/moving, and should settle down as the intent of each of the lists in the group of lists becomes better established in practice.


-BobC

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Devin Heitmueller]

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Bob Cunningham <FlyMyPG@gmail.com> wrote:
> Reasons I'd like to keep both lists going:
> 1. My subscription requests to linux-media have yielded nothing.  Anything
> broken with the approval process?
>
> 2. I agree with another poster: I only care about broadcast and cable video,
> both analog and digital.  I eventually hope to help get my "AnyTV AUTV002
> USB ATSC/QAM Tuner Stick" supported by V4L, and then use it in a MythTV
> system.  I'd prefer a list that focuses on such devices and systems, if
> possible.  Which seems to match the mission of linux-dvb!

The hybrid devices such as the one you described are the precise
reason we wanted to make a single list.  Your device has analog
aspects that would be covered by V4L and ATSC/QAM aspects that were
covered under linux-dvb.  So discussions about devices such as yours
would take place on both mailing lists, which creates a huge headache
for developers.

Devin

-- 
Devin J. Heitmueller
http://www.devinheitmueller.com
AIM: devinheitmueller

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 13:46:27 -0800
Bob Cunningham <FlyMyPG@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:13:26 +0100
> > Lars Hanisch <dvb@cinnamon-sage.de> wrote:
> > 
> >> Mike Isely wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Friday 16 January 2009 15:48:45 Patrick Boettcher wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Mauro,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Since the creation of linux-media@vger.kernel.org I'm seeing lots of
> >>>>> cross-postings between linux-dvb, linux-media and video4linux. This
> >>>>> is a little bit annoying if you are subscribed to all of those lists.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Worse is, that some people only send requests to linux-media. Like
> >>>>> that linux-dvb-only subscribers can't help...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the
> >>>>> currently subscribed users to linux-media automatically?
> >>>> I agree with Patrick. I suggest a daily automatic posting to linux-dvb 
> >>>> and video4linux telling people that on February 1st these lists 
> >>>> disappear and that they should use linux-media instead. Then they can 
> >>>> be closed down at the end of the month. I definitely wouldn't wait any 
> >>>> longer since it is rather messy right now. One month transition period 
> >>>> seems reasonable to me.
> >>>>
> >>> Amen to that.  I've been telling people to go over to linux-media, but 
> >>> old habits are hard to break.  It's time to actually make a clean break 
> >>> from the old lists.
> >>   +1 from me
> >>
> >>   Although I'm not an active developer (I'm just an interested user), 
> >> reading the lists at the moment is hard...
> > 
> > Instead of just removing the ML, maybe the better is to change the reply to to
> > linux-media and send an autoreply message to the sender.
> >> Lars.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Mauro
> 
> Reasons I'd like to keep both lists going:  
> 
> 1. My subscription requests to linux-media have yielded nothing.  Anything broken with the approval process?

There's no approval process. Just submit the "subscribe linux-media" message to
the mailman email interface. It will send you a reply to confirm your email
address. After your reply-back, you'll be subscribed.

> 2. I agree with another poster: I only care about broadcast and cable video, both analog and digital.  I eventually hope to help get my "AnyTV AUTV002 USB ATSC/QAM Tuner Stick" supported by V4L, and then use it in a MythTV system.  I'd prefer a list that focuses on such devices and systems, if possible.  Which seems to match the mission of linux-dvb!

linux-dvb were used for DVB only. No analog tuner, Composite or S-video entries
were meant to be discussed there. Another ML were used for those discussions.
So, on the case of your device, before linux-media, people needed to do
cross-posting.

However, on several cases, only one of the lists were used by the thread
authors. So, if you were interested on such boards, you would need to subscribe
both lists, otherwise, you would loose some discussions that could be
interesting for you.

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Tomas Drajsajtl]

> linux-dvb were used for DVB only. No analog tuner, Composite or S-video
entries
> were meant to be discussed there. Another ML were used for those
discussions.

And that's the case, Mauro. I guesss that many members care only about DVB
like me. What will be the next step - join some audio ML? It's also about
media... :-(

Regards,
Tomas

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Ales Jurik]

On Tuesday 20 of January 2009, Tomas Drajsajtl wrote:
> > linux-dvb were used for DVB only. No analog tuner, Composite or S-video
>
> entries
>
> > were meant to be discussed there. Another ML were used for those
>
> discussions.
>
> And that's the case, Mauro. I guesss that many members care only about DVB
> like me. 

Fully agree.

Regards,

Ales

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Devin Heitmueller]

I spent the morning giving some consideration to the comments people
made regarding the merging of the mailing lists.  As with most
attempts at an optimization, there are cases that get more efficient
and cases that get less efficient.  If done properly, the important
cases improve in efficiency while the cases that are less critical end
up a little less efficient.

Clearly, there are two classes of users on the mailing lists:  those
who read it and those who read it *and* actively contribute to it.
One of the key goals behind merging the lists was to make it more
efficient for those who have to reply to emails to not have to deal
with duplicated content, since in reality a large portion of the
emails come from people who want their device to work, and don't even
know the differences between acronyms like ATSC, QAM, DVB-T, DVB-C,
analog, etc.

Looking at the people who have responded to this thread, and the
number of threads they have actually contributed on in the last year,
the disparity is obvious:

People "in favor" of the lists being merged
118 Patrick Boettcher
205 Hans Verkuil
38 Mike Isely
196 Devin Heitmueller
"hundreds" Mauro Carvalho Chehab

People "against" of the lists being merged
2 Lars Hanisch
17 user.vdr
16 Klaus Schmidinger
2 Bob Cunningham
10 Tomas Drajsajtl
17 Ales Jurik

Yup, it's the developers who are posting on a regular basis who feel
the pain of the two different lists.  It's the people who are actively
replying to issues, dealing with problems, and trying to keep track of
it all who want the lists merged.  That said, I personally don't feel
any guilt in inconveniencing a few users who are not contributing if
it makes it easier for the people who contribute to the list on a
daily basis.

I would love to hear more from people who have contributed to more
than 20 threads who think having the two lists are a good idea.  I
doubt there will be many of them.

I was also giving some thought to the notion of a having separate
lists for users versus developers.  While this works in some
communities, I am not confident it would be appropriate for ours.
Why?  Because the notion of a "users" list is only useful in cases
where you have a large pool of users who are willing to answer
questions for others.  Look at the back history of the v4l and
linux-dvb lists, and that is nowhere to be found (aside from a few
people like CityK).  The vast majority of questions are answered by a
handful of developers, and it is no more convenient for those
developers to have separate lists.  In fact, it's less convenient
since it results in the developers being required to watch both lists.
 Think of all the projects where the "-dev" list is high traffic, but
almost all of the traffic on the "-users" list goes unanswered.

Do you want a separate users list and you're not a developer?  If so,
volunteer to help out by answering other people's emails if you know
the answer.  CityK is a shining example of this - every email he
answers about one of the devices I did the driver for is an email I
don't have to answer myself, which allows me to spend more time
writing drivers.  If we see lots of users helping each other out by
answering the questions of other users, only then will I see a
"-users" list as a sustainable idea that is worth pursuing.

Devin

-- 
Devin J. Heitmueller
http://www.devinheitmueller.com
AIM: devinheitmueller

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Tomas Drajsajtl]

Hi Devin,
your numbers say something but not everything if you don't compare the date
of the user's subscription. I am new to the forum for about 2 months and
when I was able to help or offer something I did it. Especially for some
questions about some chipsets I could have interesting answers when
neccessary. But I will not spent more time to delete several e-mails about
analog, webcams etc. where I have no knowledge or interest.

It's possible that it will be better in average, who knows, but not in all
cases. The remaining time when linux-dvb is alive I am there. I wish you
easier work with linux-media. But without me.

Have a nice day,
Tomas


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Devin Heitmueller" <devin.heitmueller@gmail.com>
To: <ajurik@quick.cz>
Cc: <linux-dvb@linuxtv.org>; <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc


> I spent the morning giving some consideration to the comments people
> made regarding the merging of the mailing lists.  As with most
> attempts at an optimization, there are cases that get more efficient
> and cases that get less efficient.  If done properly, the important
> cases improve in efficiency while the cases that are less critical end
> up a little less efficient.
>
> Clearly, there are two classes of users on the mailing lists:  those
> who read it and those who read it *and* actively contribute to it.
> One of the key goals behind merging the lists was to make it more
> efficient for those who have to reply to emails to not have to deal
> with duplicated content, since in reality a large portion of the
> emails come from people who want their device to work, and don't even
> know the differences between acronyms like ATSC, QAM, DVB-T, DVB-C,
> analog, etc.
>
> Looking at the people who have responded to this thread, and the
> number of threads they have actually contributed on in the last year,
> the disparity is obvious:
>
> People "in favor" of the lists being merged
> 118 Patrick Boettcher
> 205 Hans Verkuil
> 38 Mike Isely
> 196 Devin Heitmueller
> "hundreds" Mauro Carvalho Chehab
>
> People "against" of the lists being merged
> 2 Lars Hanisch
> 17 user.vdr
> 16 Klaus Schmidinger
> 2 Bob Cunningham
> 10 Tomas Drajsajtl
> 17 Ales Jurik
>
> Yup, it's the developers who are posting on a regular basis who feel
> the pain of the two different lists.  It's the people who are actively
> replying to issues, dealing with problems, and trying to keep track of
> it all who want the lists merged.  That said, I personally don't feel
> any guilt in inconveniencing a few users who are not contributing if
> it makes it easier for the people who contribute to the list on a
> daily basis.
>
> I would love to hear more from people who have contributed to more
> than 20 threads who think having the two lists are a good idea.  I
> doubt there will be many of them.
>
> I was also giving some thought to the notion of a having separate
> lists for users versus developers.  While this works in some
> communities, I am not confident it would be appropriate for ours.
> Why?  Because the notion of a "users" list is only useful in cases
> where you have a large pool of users who are willing to answer
> questions for others.  Look at the back history of the v4l and
> linux-dvb lists, and that is nowhere to be found (aside from a few
> people like CityK).  The vast majority of questions are answered by a
> handful of developers, and it is no more convenient for those
> developers to have separate lists.  In fact, it's less convenient
> since it results in the developers being required to watch both lists.
>  Think of all the projects where the "-dev" list is high traffic, but
> almost all of the traffic on the "-users" list goes unanswered.
>
> Do you want a separate users list and you're not a developer?  If so,
> volunteer to help out by answering other people's emails if you know
> the answer.  CityK is a shining example of this - every email he
> answers about one of the devices I did the driver for is an email I
> don't have to answer myself, which allows me to spend more time
> writing drivers.  If we see lots of users helping each other out by
> answering the questions of other users, only then will I see a
> "-users" list as a sustainable idea that is worth pursuing.
>
> Devin
>
> -- 
> Devin J. Heitmueller
> http://www.devinheitmueller.com
> AIM: devinheitmueller
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb users mailing list
> For V4L/DVB development, please use instead linux-media@vger.kernel.org
> linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
>

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Steven Toth]

>>
>> Do you want a separate users list and you're not a developer?  If so,

The engineering time I can put into Linux varies, it always has, so I'm not
completely up to speed on this issue. Forgive me.

What I personally would like to see is a separation between user and dev lists.

In addition, I don't have a problem with a combined v4l / dvb developer list,
although I can see how other might. I'm easy on this.

Personally, when I'm between 'furious bouts of Linux activity' like now, the only
thing I should be spending my time reading is development related issues.

When I have time I'll help users, but when I have very little time I need to focus
quickly on the important Linux v4l/dvb issues related to my trees / projects.

- Steve



_______________________________________________
linux-dvb users mailing list
For V4L/DVB development, please use instead linux-media@vger.kernel.org
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mike Isely]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009, Devin Heitmueller wrote:

> I spent the morning giving some consideration to the comments people
> made regarding the merging of the mailing lists.  As with most
> attempts at an optimization, there are cases that get more efficient
> and cases that get less efficient.  If done properly, the important
> cases improve in efficiency while the cases that are less critical end
> up a little less efficient.
> 
> Clearly, there are two classes of users on the mailing lists:  those
> who read it and those who read it *and* actively contribute to it.
> One of the key goals behind merging the lists was to make it more
> efficient for those who have to reply to emails to not have to deal
> with duplicated content, since in reality a large portion of the
> emails come from people who want their device to work, and don't even
> know the differences between acronyms like ATSC, QAM, DVB-T, DVB-C,
> analog, etc.
> 
> Looking at the people who have responded to this thread, and the
> number of threads they have actually contributed on in the last year,
> the disparity is obvious:
> 
> People "in favor" of the lists being merged
> 118 Patrick Boettcher
> 205 Hans Verkuil

> 38 Mike Isely

I've contributed to 38 different threads in the past year?  Wow, I 
thought I had been staying mostly in the background...


> 196 Devin Heitmueller
> "hundreds" Mauro Carvalho Chehab
> 
> People "against" of the lists being merged
> 2 Lars Hanisch
> 17 user.vdr
> 16 Klaus Schmidinger
> 2 Bob Cunningham
> 10 Tomas Drajsajtl
> 17 Ales Jurik
> 
> Yup, it's the developers who are posting on a regular basis who feel
> the pain of the two different lists.  It's the people who are actively
> replying to issues, dealing with problems, and trying to keep track of
> it all who want the lists merged.  That said, I personally don't feel
> any guilt in inconveniencing a few users who are not contributing if
> it makes it easier for the people who contribute to the list on a
> daily basis.
> 
> I would love to hear more from people who have contributed to more
> than 20 threads who think having the two lists are a good idea.  I
> doubt there will be many of them.

   [...]

I don't have a strong preference about a -users and -dev split vs a 
single list.  It might be worth at least trying - one can always go 
back to a single list if the experiment fails.

Some have posted that they don't want to be bothered about all the "V4L 
noise" if they only care about DVB.  But look at this from a driver's 
viewpoint.  Some drivers aren't just V4L or just DVB - the pvrusb2 
driver, being that it handles a few hybrid devices, plays both sides of 
the fence, and some issues that may arise are not clearly obvious 
whether V4L or DVB is the correct topic.  So to which list does one 
expect to post?  (OK, maybe in my case it's the pvrusb2 list, but the 
question is still valid in the general sense and is only going to get 
more commonplace over time.)

  -Mike


-- 

Mike Isely
isely @ pobox (dot) com
PGP: 03 54 43 4D 75 E5 CC 92 71 16 01 E2 B5 F5 C1 E8

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Lars Hanisch]

Devin Heitmueller wrote:
> People "in favor" of the lists being merged
> 118 Patrick Boettcher
> 205 Hans Verkuil
> 38 Mike Isely
> 196 Devin Heitmueller
> "hundreds" Mauro Carvalho Chehab
> 
> People "against" of the lists being merged
> 2 Lars Hanisch
> 17 user.vdr
> 16 Klaus Schmidinger
> 2 Bob Cunningham
> 10 Tomas Drajsajtl
> 17 Ales Jurik

  Just for the records: I'm "in favor" of the merge, not against... Or 
have I missunderstood the post I replied to? Never mind. :)

> Yup, it's the developers who are posting on a regular basis who feel
> the pain of the two different lists.  It's the people who are actively
> replying to issues, dealing with problems, and trying to keep track of
> it all who want the lists merged.  That said, I personally don't feel
> any guilt in inconveniencing a few users who are not contributing if
> it makes it easier for the people who contribute to the list on a
> daily basis.

  I'm a "user-only" of my PVR150/350 since about 2 years and I read 
these lists (ivtv-devel, ivtv-users, video4linux, and now linux-media) 
because I want to stay in touch with the really good work you developers 
are doing (also a "Thank you" from my wife, who loves our VDR). And I 
want to know when some of the issues I encounter are solved, so I can 
update my kernel. Sadly I haven't the time to invest my 
development-knowledge into linux-driver-development (my daily work is 
application-development, and yes, it's windows, shame on me ;-)).
  So, if the lists get merged or not, I still will be reading them. I 
just want to give a view from a passive reader. And from that point of 
view a merge would be fine...
  But I agree that the main developers should be the ones that have the 
final stay on this.

Lars.

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Andy Walls]

On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 10:24 -0500, Devin Heitmueller wrote:
> I spent the morning giving some consideration to the comments people
> made regarding the merging of the mailing lists.  As with most
> attempts at an optimization, there are cases that get more efficient
> and cases that get less efficient.  If done properly, the important
> cases improve in efficiency while the cases that are less critical end
> up a little less efficient.
> 
> Clearly, there are two classes of users on the mailing lists:  those
> who read it and those who read it *and* actively contribute to it.
> One of the key goals behind merging the lists was to make it more
> efficient for those who have to reply to emails to not have to deal
> with duplicated content, since in reality a large portion of the
> emails come from people who want their device to work, and don't even
> know the differences between acronyms like ATSC, QAM, DVB-T, DVB-C,
> analog, etc.
> 
> Looking at the people who have responded to this thread, and the
> number of threads they have actually contributed on in the last year,
> the disparity is obvious:
> 
> People "in favor" of the lists being merged
> 118 Patrick Boettcher
> 205 Hans Verkuil
> 38 Mike Isely
> 196 Devin Heitmueller
> "hundreds" Mauro Carvalho Chehab
> 
> People "against" of the lists being merged
> 2 Lars Hanisch
> 17 user.vdr
> 16 Klaus Schmidinger
> 2 Bob Cunningham
> 10 Tomas Drajsajtl
> 17 Ales Jurik
> 
> Yup, it's the developers who are posting on a regular basis who feel
> the pain of the two different lists.

Just to interject, I feel the pain of at least 4/5 lists right now:

   video4linux, linux-dvb, linux-media, ivtv-users, ivtv-devel

So any reduction in the number of lists suits me just fine, but not for
reasons of personal mail management, but for distribution of information
to a wide audience.

For example, to reach all the cx18 users, to let them know of a change
that may impact them without any testing feedback, I have to "broadcast"
to all the lists except the ivtv-devel list.  Then unfortunatley
feedback from users, who for some reason or another can't/don't post to
the other lists, is missed by users on the other lists.

I like the lists for the interactive creation/accumulation of knowledge
about a particular device or subsystem.  Subsystem (dvb, v4l)
information will likely rarely crosses list topic boundaries, but device
information will probably do so much more often due to hybrid cards,
silicon tuners, etc.

So on the "intake" of information

1) a single list helps for consolidation of knowledge, but doesn't help
organization - that must be done later

2) multiple lists help for organization of knowledge, but don't help
with consolidation of knowledge on related details from the separate
lists - that must be done later


So between the two postprocessing activites in the above -
organization/sorting once it hits the single list; or searching or
consolidating, from separate lists, knowledge on a related detail -

a) which provides the most benefit on the amount to work done?  (Who
benefits? who does the work?)

b) which scheme produces/amasses "higher quality" knowledge for the
least amount of work?

 
(I'm not going to provide an answer for those, but I will note that the
LKML appears to host discussions on many subsystems in the Linux Kernel
in one list.  So I suspect there is some benefit to amassed, but
unsorted knowledge.)


>   It's the people who are actively
> replying to issues, dealing with problems, and trying to keep track of
> it all who want the lists merged.  That said, I personally don't feel
> any guilt in inconveniencing a few users who are not contributing if
> it makes it easier for the people who contribute to the list on a
> daily basis.
> 
> I would love to hear more from people who have contributed to more
> than 20 threads who think having the two lists are a good idea.  I
> doubt there will be many of them.

It seems like to cut the baby in half would be to have multiple separate
users lists and one consolidated devel list.  (We had a three list
configuration before, but development requests/bug reports from users
were rarely discussed on the v4l-dvb-maintainers' list as it wasn't
billed to the public on the linuxtv.org site.) 



> I was also giving some thought to the notion of a having separate
> lists for users versus developers.  While this works in some
> communities, I am not confident it would be appropriate for ours.
> Why?  Because the notion of a "users" list is only useful in cases
> where you have a large pool of users who are willing to answer
> questions for others.  Look at the back history of the v4l and
> linux-dvb lists, and that is nowhere to be found (aside from a few
> people like CityK).  The vast majority of questions are answered by a
> handful of developers, and it is no more convenient for those
> developers to have separate lists.  In fact, it's less convenient
> since it results in the developers being required to watch both lists.
>  Think of all the projects where the "-dev" list is high traffic, but
> almost all of the traffic on the "-users" list goes unanswered.
> 
> Do you want a separate users list and you're not a developer?  If so,
> volunteer to help out by answering other people's emails if you know
> the answer.  CityK is a shining example of this - every email he
> answers about one of the devices I did the driver for is an email I
> don't have to answer myself, which allows me to spend more time
> writing drivers.  If we see lots of users helping each other out by
> answering the questions of other users, only then will I see a
> "-users" list as a sustainable idea that is worth pursuing.

Based on my experience with the ivtv-user and ivtv-devel list, these are
my personal, subjective observations (Hans may have a different
opinions):

1) as software for a device becomes more stable, dev list message rate
for that device drops off and user list traffic picks up.   In this
case, most problems become userland app or system configuration
problems, with which many users can help, if they desire.

2) I believe the converse of 1) is true as well: the less reliable the
driver software for a device, the higher the traffic on the devel list
and the less traffic on the users list.  Problems that only developers
are likely to address are common.

3) When you have a devel/user list separation, the on-topic devel list
messages are clear red flags that get developer attenion.

4) Even when you have a good users list, you're still only looking at a
small handful of dedicated users that answer a bulk of the questions.

Regards,
Andy

> Devin

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:06:58 -0500
Andy Walls <awalls@radix.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 10:24 -0500, Devin Heitmueller wrote:
> > I spent the morning giving some consideration to the comments people
> > made regarding the merging of the mailing lists.  As with most
> > attempts at an optimization, there are cases that get more efficient
> > and cases that get less efficient.  If done properly, the important
> > cases improve in efficiency while the cases that are less critical end
> > up a little less efficient.
> > 
> > Clearly, there are two classes of users on the mailing lists:  those
> > who read it and those who read it *and* actively contribute to it.
> > One of the key goals behind merging the lists was to make it more
> > efficient for those who have to reply to emails to not have to deal
> > with duplicated content, since in reality a large portion of the
> > emails come from people who want their device to work, and don't even
> > know the differences between acronyms like ATSC, QAM, DVB-T, DVB-C,
> > analog, etc.
> > 
> > Looking at the people who have responded to this thread, and the
> > number of threads they have actually contributed on in the last year,
> > the disparity is obvious:
> > 
> > People "in favor" of the lists being merged
> > 118 Patrick Boettcher
> > 205 Hans Verkuil
> > 38 Mike Isely
> > 196 Devin Heitmueller
> > "hundreds" Mauro Carvalho Chehab
> > 
> > People "against" of the lists being merged
> > 2 Lars Hanisch
> > 17 user.vdr
> > 16 Klaus Schmidinger
> > 2 Bob Cunningham
> > 10 Tomas Drajsajtl
> > 17 Ales Jurik
> > 
> > Yup, it's the developers who are posting on a regular basis who feel
> > the pain of the two different lists.
> 
> Just to interject, I feel the pain of at least 4/5 lists right now:
> 
>    video4linux, linux-dvb, linux-media, ivtv-users, ivtv-devel
> 
> So any reduction in the number of lists suits me just fine, but not for
> reasons of personal mail management, but for distribution of information
> to a wide audience.
> 
> For example, to reach all the cx18 users, to let them know of a change
> that may impact them without any testing feedback, I have to "broadcast"
> to all the lists except the ivtv-devel list.  Then unfortunatley
> feedback from users, who for some reason or another can't/don't post to
> the other lists, is missed by users on the other lists.
> 
> I like the lists for the interactive creation/accumulation of knowledge
> about a particular device or subsystem.  Subsystem (dvb, v4l)
> information will likely rarely crosses list topic boundaries, but device
> information will probably do so much more often due to hybrid cards,
> silicon tuners, etc.
> 
> So on the "intake" of information
> 
> 1) a single list helps for consolidation of knowledge, but doesn't help
> organization - that must be done later
> 
> 2) multiple lists help for organization of knowledge, but don't help
> with consolidation of knowledge on related details from the separate
> lists - that must be done later
> 
> 
> So between the two postprocessing activites in the above -
> organization/sorting once it hits the single list; or searching or
> consolidating, from separate lists, knowledge on a related detail -
> 
> a) which provides the most benefit on the amount to work done?  (Who
> benefits? who does the work?)
> 
> b) which scheme produces/amasses "higher quality" knowledge for the
> least amount of work?
> 
>  
> (I'm not going to provide an answer for those, but I will note that the
> LKML appears to host discussions on many subsystems in the Linux Kernel
> in one list.  So I suspect there is some benefit to amassed, but
> unsorted knowledge.)
> 
> 
> >   It's the people who are actively
> > replying to issues, dealing with problems, and trying to keep track of
> > it all who want the lists merged.  That said, I personally don't feel
> > any guilt in inconveniencing a few users who are not contributing if
> > it makes it easier for the people who contribute to the list on a
> > daily basis.
> > 
> > I would love to hear more from people who have contributed to more
> > than 20 threads who think having the two lists are a good idea.  I
> > doubt there will be many of them.
> 
> It seems like to cut the baby in half would be to have multiple separate
> users lists and one consolidated devel list.  (We had a three list
> configuration before, but development requests/bug reports from users
> were rarely discussed on the v4l-dvb-maintainers' list as it wasn't
> billed to the public on the linuxtv.org site.) 
> 
> 
> 
> > I was also giving some thought to the notion of a having separate
> > lists for users versus developers.  While this works in some
> > communities, I am not confident it would be appropriate for ours.
> > Why?  Because the notion of a "users" list is only useful in cases
> > where you have a large pool of users who are willing to answer
> > questions for others.  Look at the back history of the v4l and
> > linux-dvb lists, and that is nowhere to be found (aside from a few
> > people like CityK).  The vast majority of questions are answered by a
> > handful of developers, and it is no more convenient for those
> > developers to have separate lists.  In fact, it's less convenient
> > since it results in the developers being required to watch both lists.
> >  Think of all the projects where the "-dev" list is high traffic, but
> > almost all of the traffic on the "-users" list goes unanswered.
> > 
> > Do you want a separate users list and you're not a developer?  If so,
> > volunteer to help out by answering other people's emails if you know
> > the answer.  CityK is a shining example of this - every email he
> > answers about one of the devices I did the driver for is an email I
> > don't have to answer myself, which allows me to spend more time
> > writing drivers.  If we see lots of users helping each other out by
> > answering the questions of other users, only then will I see a
> > "-users" list as a sustainable idea that is worth pursuing.
> 
> Based on my experience with the ivtv-user and ivtv-devel list, these are
> my personal, subjective observations (Hans may have a different
> opinions):
> 
> 1) as software for a device becomes more stable, dev list message rate
> for that device drops off and user list traffic picks up.   In this
> case, most problems become userland app or system configuration
> problems, with which many users can help, if they desire.
> 
> 2) I believe the converse of 1) is true as well: the less reliable the
> driver software for a device, the higher the traffic on the devel list
> and the less traffic on the users list.  Problems that only developers
> are likely to address are common.
> 
> 3) When you have a devel/user list separation, the on-topic devel list
> messages are clear red flags that get developer attenion.
> 
> 4) Even when you have a good users list, you're still only looking at a
> small handful of dedicated users that answer a bulk of the questions.

We may create one or more users list, if people really think this would be nice.
However, I suspect that most developers won't have time to read both users and
devel ML's. 

Maybe a bigger issue is to repeat the situation we had before linux-media: 3
main lists (plus some dedicated ones for some drivers like uvc, pvrusb2,
ivtv-users, ivtv-devel, ..., and, still some posts at the very high traffic
LKML), and developers busy reading the threads on those lists instead of
working on their drivers. Several patches were lost in the middle of the ML's,
without any tool to remind us about they.

By having several users lists (for example, having a dedicated users list
for a driver, like saa7134), some people may keep sending patches and other
devel stuff at the users ML, and later complain that those patches are going
to /dev/null or that the problem were reported but never fixed.

So, for now, I think that the better is to focus the efforts into one ML. If
this doesn't work properly, then we may review it and create some focused users
ML's.

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Bob Cunningham]

I had previously viewed this list, and the linux-media list creation discussion, from my narrow perspective of wanting to get a single device working, so I only read list traffic that seemed related to that goal.  The overall reality far is larger than I had initially suspected.

Reading this thread makes it clear to me that the various lists we're discussing means that the general topic of Linux video/audio media is:
1. A very large topic!
2. A "basket of snakes" that a) are intimately interconnected, and b) won't be easily untangled.

In the early days of the Internet (1981, for me), we created Usenet newsgroups instead of mail lists.  The newsgroup creation process (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/creating-newsgroups/part1/) ensured the focus and audience were agreed to (outside of the alt domain, of course).  The Usenet newsgroup naming system also provided a natural hierarchy for list refinement and specialization, so a top-level group would be created, with sub-level groups added only when needed.  Most importantly, an initial newsgroup FAQ would be generated that would be automatically posted every month, and updated as needed (it was a permanent thread).  

With the complexity of linux media, and the needs of the users, developers, and testers, I'd recommend creating and periodically posting a list FAQ that provides the following:
1. An overview of the purpose of this list, access methods (vger, gmane, etc.), including how to search the archives.
2. Pointers to other relevant lists (each of which would have complementary FAQs).
3. Links for newbie users (including things like MythTV and hardware compatibility pages).
4. Links to newbie developers and testers (repository locations, building from source, etc.).

Hopefully, a periodic FAQ can help limit repetitive questions, reduce total traffic, and go a long way toward satisfying the needs of all list subscribers and posters.  

The alternative, creating more lists with narrower focus, seems impractical at this point.  Splitting the "basket of snakes" into more baskets seems to mean we'll just have snakes everywhere, each trying to be in every basket.  The underlying problem seems to be that the current Linux media architecture (as created and maintained by developers) doesn't map cleanly to user perspectives and applications (webcams, DVRs, video production, etc.).  It's a many-to-many mapping that may be difficult to optimize into any practical number of smaller low-traffic lists with limited cross-posting.

Would a set of FAQs, one per list, be useful to help manage this situation?

-BobC


Andy Walls wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 10:24 -0500, Devin Heitmueller wrote:
>> I spent the morning giving some consideration to the comments people
>> made regarding the merging of the mailing lists.  As with most
>> attempts at an optimization, there are cases that get more efficient
>> and cases that get less efficient.  If done properly, the important
>> cases improve in efficiency while the cases that are less critical end
>> up a little less efficient.
>>
>> Clearly, there are two classes of users on the mailing lists:  those
>> who read it and those who read it *and* actively contribute to it.
>> One of the key goals behind merging the lists was to make it more
>> efficient for those who have to reply to emails to not have to deal
>> with duplicated content, since in reality a large portion of the
>> emails come from people who want their device to work, and don't even
>> know the differences between acronyms like ATSC, QAM, DVB-T, DVB-C,
>> analog, etc.
>>
>> Looking at the people who have responded to this thread, and the
>> number of threads they have actually contributed on in the last year,
>> the disparity is obvious:
>>
>> People "in favor" of the lists being merged
>> 118 Patrick Boettcher
>> 205 Hans Verkuil
>> 38 Mike Isely
>> 196 Devin Heitmueller
>> "hundreds" Mauro Carvalho Chehab
>>
>> People "against" of the lists being merged
>> 2 Lars Hanisch
>> 17 user.vdr
>> 16 Klaus Schmidinger
>> 2 Bob Cunningham
>> 10 Tomas Drajsajtl
>> 17 Ales Jurik
>>
>> Yup, it's the developers who are posting on a regular basis who feel
>> the pain of the two different lists.
> 
> Just to interject, I feel the pain of at least 4/5 lists right now:
> 
>    video4linux, linux-dvb, linux-media, ivtv-users, ivtv-devel
> 
> So any reduction in the number of lists suits me just fine, but not for
> reasons of personal mail management, but for distribution of information
> to a wide audience.
> 
> For example, to reach all the cx18 users, to let them know of a change
> that may impact them without any testing feedback, I have to "broadcast"
> to all the lists except the ivtv-devel list.  Then unfortunatley
> feedback from users, who for some reason or another can't/don't post to
> the other lists, is missed by users on the other lists.
> 
> I like the lists for the interactive creation/accumulation of knowledge
> about a particular device or subsystem.  Subsystem (dvb, v4l)
> information will likely rarely crosses list topic boundaries, but device
> information will probably do so much more often due to hybrid cards,
> silicon tuners, etc.
> 
> So on the "intake" of information
> 
> 1) a single list helps for consolidation of knowledge, but doesn't help
> organization - that must be done later
> 
> 2) multiple lists help for organization of knowledge, but don't help
> with consolidation of knowledge on related details from the separate
> lists - that must be done later
> 
> 
> So between the two postprocessing activites in the above -
> organization/sorting once it hits the single list; or searching or
> consolidating, from separate lists, knowledge on a related detail -
> 
> a) which provides the most benefit on the amount to work done?  (Who
> benefits? who does the work?)
> 
> b) which scheme produces/amasses "higher quality" knowledge for the
> least amount of work?
> 
>  
> (I'm not going to provide an answer for those, but I will note that the
> LKML appears to host discussions on many subsystems in the Linux Kernel
> in one list.  So I suspect there is some benefit to amassed, but
> unsorted knowledge.)
> 
> 
>>   It's the people who are actively
>> replying to issues, dealing with problems, and trying to keep track of
>> it all who want the lists merged.  That said, I personally don't feel
>> any guilt in inconveniencing a few users who are not contributing if
>> it makes it easier for the people who contribute to the list on a
>> daily basis.
>>
>> I would love to hear more from people who have contributed to more
>> than 20 threads who think having the two lists are a good idea.  I
>> doubt there will be many of them.
> 
> It seems like to cut the baby in half would be to have multiple separate
> users lists and one consolidated devel list.  (We had a three list
> configuration before, but development requests/bug reports from users
> were rarely discussed on the v4l-dvb-maintainers' list as it wasn't
> billed to the public on the linuxtv.org site.) 
> 
> 
> 
>> I was also giving some thought to the notion of a having separate
>> lists for users versus developers.  While this works in some
>> communities, I am not confident it would be appropriate for ours.
>> Why?  Because the notion of a "users" list is only useful in cases
>> where you have a large pool of users who are willing to answer
>> questions for others.  Look at the back history of the v4l and
>> linux-dvb lists, and that is nowhere to be found (aside from a few
>> people like CityK).  The vast majority of questions are answered by a
>> handful of developers, and it is no more convenient for those
>> developers to have separate lists.  In fact, it's less convenient
>> since it results in the developers being required to watch both lists.
>>  Think of all the projects where the "-dev" list is high traffic, but
>> almost all of the traffic on the "-users" list goes unanswered.
>>
>> Do you want a separate users list and you're not a developer?  If so,
>> volunteer to help out by answering other people's emails if you know
>> the answer.  CityK is a shining example of this - every email he
>> answers about one of the devices I did the driver for is an email I
>> don't have to answer myself, which allows me to spend more time
>> writing drivers.  If we see lots of users helping each other out by
>> answering the questions of other users, only then will I see a
>> "-users" list as a sustainable idea that is worth pursuing.
> 
> Based on my experience with the ivtv-user and ivtv-devel list, these are
> my personal, subjective observations (Hans may have a different
> opinions):
> 
> 1) as software for a device becomes more stable, dev list message rate
> for that device drops off and user list traffic picks up.   In this
> case, most problems become userland app or system configuration
> problems, with which many users can help, if they desire.
> 
> 2) I believe the converse of 1) is true as well: the less reliable the
> driver software for a device, the higher the traffic on the devel list
> and the less traffic on the users list.  Problems that only developers
> are likely to address are common.
> 
> 3) When you have a devel/user list separation, the on-topic devel list
> messages are clear red flags that get developer attenion.
> 
> 4) Even when you have a good users list, you're still only looking at a
> small handful of dedicated users that answer a bulk of the questions.
> 
> Regards,
> Andy
> 
>> Devin
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb users mailing list
> For V4L/DVB development, please use instead linux-media@vger.kernel.org
> linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
> 

[linux-dvb] Fwd: Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Henrik Beckman]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 644 bytes --]

Do you want a separate users list and you're not a developer?


No,
There are to few "educated" users, also much of the problems are new
hardware rev, new device, reception problem and not realy user solvable.
Developers will have to surf the user list to catch problems or "super-user"
will have to moderate and lift cases to the developer list.

When the community is bigger and more stable a split list will make better
sense, or when the list are flooded by stupid questions.

On the other hand if a split list would give me better device compability
and development rate I will happily browse multiple lists and help where I
can.

/Henrik

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 978 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 228 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb users mailing list
For V4L/DVB development, please use instead linux-media@vger.kernel.org
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[BOUWSMA Barry]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Patrick Boettcher wrote:

> Why not closing linux-dvb (and video4linux) and transferring the currently 
> subscribed users to linux-media automatically?

Can I offer my opinions to differ?

First, I'm only subscribed to -dvb in order to post, yet still
I haven't posted what I originally planned to post before
unsubscribing until another device fails to work.  Luckily
the video4linux list was impossible to access (even the
archives needed subsciption, furrfu).

Anyway, soon after the creation of -media, I saw that the
crossposts from v4linux were of no interest to me (I'm only
interested in delivery of already-digital payloads, and am
not concerned with webcams, analogue radio or TV, remote
controls, and so on) -- since then I've skipped something
like 2/3 of the posts on -media, and today, I wouldn't want
it to appear in my mailbox.  But that's just my interest.

Also, I seem to recall that one intent of -media was to
focus on developer interest, as the initial posts revealed,
which also frees developers with better things to do than
to explain how to, for example, get a list of channels, or
stream a particular channel and be bothered by beginner or
simple questions that could be answered by those without
developer abilities.  Like me.

Anyway, it's no big deal to me.  I'm used to how the one
FreeBSD -multimedia list covers everything including sound,
yet typically gets fewer posts in a week than -dvb could
see in a day, and I can't see myself investing in another
DVB-type receiver soon until DVB-S2 support gets properly
rounded out and 100% reliable for all `experimental'-tagged
devices, so I'm quite content to browse the list just as I
skim the kernel list, or peer in on a few dozen other BSD-
type lists whenever I feel like it.


yerz,
barry bouwsma
off to answer a newbie question next

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[user.vdr]

I think it's a lame idea to clump all media related stuff into one
mailing list from separate ml's because 1) it's too general of a topic
and 2) those ml's already had a lot of activity on their own.  The
idea of sifting through tons of posts of no interest is quite a hassle
to say the least.  This "solution" just doesn't seem very well thought
out imo but it is what it is I guess.

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mike Isely]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, user.vdr wrote:

> I think it's a lame idea to clump all media related stuff into one
> mailing list from separate ml's because 1) it's too general of a topic
> and 2) those ml's already had a lot of activity on their own.  The
> idea of sifting through tons of posts of no interest is quite a hassle
> to say the least.  This "solution" just doesn't seem very well thought
> out imo but it is what it is I guess.

That's still better than sifting through MULTIPLE COPIES of the same 
post from different lists, which frequently is the case right now.

  -Mike


-- 

Mike Isely
isely @ pobox (dot) com
PGP: 03 54 43 4D 75 E5 CC 92 71 16 01 E2 B5 F5 C1 E8

Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[BOUWSMA Barry]

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009, Mike Isely wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, user.vdr wrote:
> > I think it's a lame idea to clump all media related stuff into one
> > mailing list from separate ml's because 1) it's too general of a topic
> > and 2) those ml's already had a lot of activity on their own.  The
> > idea of sifting through tons of posts of no interest is quite a hassle
> > to say the least.  This "solution" just doesn't seem very well thought
> > out imo but it is what it is I guess.

> That's still better than sifting through MULTIPLE COPIES of the same 
> post from different lists, which frequently is the case right now.

Sounds like some opinions which won't easily change, as well
as different experiences, that I'll try to explain...

First, given the strong opinions people have had in the past
about getting a direct reply as well as a list copy, I think
it's worth a mention that it appears that both g00gle-mail
and yah00! use the Message-ID as the key to a database with
the result that duplicates are suppressed, in spite of the
different header contents.  This was at first very unnerving
when I didn't get two yah00! copies of mail where I was a
direct recipient, which was quite different from what I had
grown used to years ago, when I was running my own simple mail 
server.

This went from unnerving to annoying when I realized that
g00gle appeared to use the Message-ID as key to a database
not just covering the Inbox, but my entire mail, such that
my own gmail sent-mail copy existing meant that it wouldn't
ever appear in my inbox.

Now I could be misunderstanding how these large providers
do things internally, but in effect, duplicates there are
suppressed.  Maybe this is configurable, as part of their
filtering, but I wouldn't know as my browser of choice was
unable to access their configuration, and actually, was
completely unable to access gmail last I tried.

That should mean that while I include user.vdr with a cc:,
that account should by default see this only once, whether
or not it's subscribed to -media as well as -dvb.  Just as
a demonstration.  Whereas Mike, you see this twice, as I
stripped your personal addresses since this isn't important
enough for you to see even once, let alone four times, and
your provider apparently doesn't do the merging my M-ID.

And yes, I am one of those who *does* wish to receive a
duplicate copy of a message sent directly to me as well as
to a list, if it's important enough not to get lost in the
noise or overlooked.  Others disagree, and I respect that.
Particularly when I go back to casual 'net access, and have
to sift through hundreds of messages at a time, once a week,
once a month, once every eight months...


Up until recently, I *did* read all linux-dvb messages, and
resisted the temptation to reply to people posting about
analogue devices by saying v4linux is over there ==>
due to the -dvb giving a clue in the list name.  While you
won't be annoyed by duplicates, I'm going to be missing
some posts I would have read on -dvb.  Not that that's a
bad thing, I'm sure most will agree, particularly anyone
I've misled by trying to ``help''.


Understand that my objection is not to the move to vger,
which is a good thing, but to the merger of the two lists
of different topics and some non-overlapping end-users
who may be overwhelmed by the doubling of message volume.


Here's some flamebait, and I'll probably regret this, but
hey, I only get one chance to live -- why not merge in the
em28xx mailing list from mcentral.de as well?  That covers
hybrid devices, both analogue and DVB-like, and would save
me as a non-subscriber from having to crosspost, and would
save subscribers there and to -dvb or -media from seeing
those posts multiple times, and, um, no, I'm not serious,
but separate lists of overlapping interests do exist, and
crossposting/multiple copies do exist, and at least some
services out there are able to minimise the inconvenience
of duplicate copies...

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to crosspost to mcentral.
Haven't started a good flamewar since the last time I woke
up...


barry bouwsma
won't someone please think of the newbies...

Re: [linux-media] Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Klaus Schmidinger]

On 17.01.2009 06:51, user.vdr wrote:
> I think it's a lame idea to clump all media related stuff into one
> mailing list from separate ml's because 1) it's too general of a topic
> and 2) those ml's already had a lot of activity on their own.  The
> idea of sifting through tons of posts of no interest is quite a hassle
> to say the least.  This "solution" just doesn't seem very well thought
> out imo but it is what it is I guess.

I also don't like the high traffic on linux-media. linux-dvb was exactly
dedicated to DVB, and that's all that interests me. I'm not interested
in analog video or cameras or whatever stuff that's discussed on
linux-media.

> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org

I guess that's what I'll be doing... :-(

Klaus

Re: [linux-media] Re: [linux-dvb] Cross-posting linux-media, linux-dvb etc

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 10:53:42 +0100
Klaus Schmidinger <Klaus.Schmidinger@cadsoft.de> wrote:

> On 17.01.2009 06:51, user.vdr wrote:
> > I think it's a lame idea to clump all media related stuff into one
> > mailing list from separate ml's because 1) it's too general of a topic
> > and 2) those ml's already had a lot of activity on their own.  The
> > idea of sifting through tons of posts of no interest is quite a hassle
> > to say the least.  This "solution" just doesn't seem very well thought
> > out imo but it is what it is I guess.
> 
> I also don't like the high traffic on linux-media. linux-dvb was exactly
> dedicated to DVB, and that's all that interests me. I'm not interested
> in analog video or cameras or whatever stuff that's discussed on
> linux-media.

>From driver development POV, there's no sense of splitting analog and digital
stuff.

A large amount of drivers support both analog and digital API (bttv, cx88,
saa7134, saa7146, pvrusb2, em28xx, cx18, cx23885...). With the previous
situation, all discussions for those drivers would require cross-postings. This
is bad, since developers needed to read the same message twice (or even three
times, due to v4l-dvb-maintainers ML). So, their precious time that would
otherwise be used in development were lost just to read the same message again
and again.

Also, if you look at the recent past posts on V4L ML, several of them are related to
DVB stuff.There were several cross-postings there as well.

I can't see a clear solution to reduce the traffic on linux-media. We could
eventually think on having some per-driver ML's, but I'm afraid that this
wouldn't work nice... For example, an issue on an saa7134 driver with xc3028
should be posted at saa7134 or at xc3028 ML?


Cheers,
Mauro