gobo-eiffel-develop

[gobo-eiffel-develop] new mailing lists

[<fr...@ne...>]

>> So what I'm planing to
>> do is to create one mailing list per Gobo library and tool:

I'm sorry I missed the original message so I'm commenting a bit 
too late, but is it really useful to have that many mailing lists? 
In my opinion, mailing lists generally should be divided when 
the volume on one is too big.

To me Gobo is a whole and I think people interested in Gobo 
are normally interested in it as a whole, even if they don't 
actively take part in all areas. It's interesting to see what 
happens in other areas even if you don't develop them, and 
you can throw in the odd comment in other areas or catch 
general threads which just drift to the general from something 
specific. By dividing the structure, people will only 
subscribe to what they're explicitely interested in and miss 
half the interesting discussions which inevitably will be 
in the 'wrong' list. Plus it undermines the project spirit 
as people won't know what the others are doing.

It's also a bit odd to have more mailing lists than active 
developers.

If there's a need for segmentation, I'd rather see 
develop vs. user (questions about existing code, new 
user questions etc) rather than having so many lists.

-- 
Franck Arnaud ~ email: fr...@ne...

[gobo-eiffel-develop] new mailing lists

[<fr...@ne...>]

I did really miss the original message and I've just 
know checked the archive, so I've just seen the 
rationale:

> that most of the technical discussions about the
> development of 'geant' and 'gexace' have been done privately
> in the fear of flooding this mailing list with too many
> implementation details, even though some of you may have
> been interested in taking part into some of these discussions.

It's a good question, but personally I think it's much better to 
have that than the division while the volume is manageable (and 
I guess that even with all the private discussions thrown in 
it would remain OK). The user/develop division could also 
partly deal with the problem of too many implementation details 
for users.

-- 
Franck Arnaud ~ email: fr...@ne...

Re: [gobo-eiffel-develop] new mailing lists

[Eric B. <er...@go...>]

fr...@ne... wrote:
> 
> >> So what I'm planing to
> >> do is to create one mailing list per Gobo library and tool:
> 
> I'm sorry I missed the original message so I'm commenting a bit
> too late,

I don't know if it's too late or not. I posted my initial
message a few days before actually creating the new mailing
lists but got no remarks, which I too quickly interpreted as
an unanimous agreement.

Now, no messages have been sent to these mailing lists yet,
and only a couple of people have already subscribed. So
even though I think that there is no way to delete a mailing
list, I'm still open to discussion and if people agree with
Franck, I can try to delete them (or we can leave them
inactive and I could notify the people when they accidentally
post to these mailing lists so that they repost their
message to 'gobo-eiffel-develop').

So the question is: do you mind receiving messages about
low level technical discussions of Gobo classes in
'gobo-eiffel-develop'? Messages can be as interesting
as discussing about the overall design of a cluster, or
as borrowing as arguing how to indent an "if" instruction
in a feature of a given class.

> If there's a need for segmentation, I'd rather see
> develop vs. user (questions about existing code, new
> user questions etc) rather than having so many lists.

I think that the purpose of SourceForge is to host
project developments. So I'm quite happy using the
already existing Yahoogroups Gobo mailing list:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gobo-eiffel/

for user related discussions.

-- 
Eric Bezault
mailto:er...@go...
http://www.gobosoft.com

Re: [gobo-eiffel-develop] new mailing lists

[Ian E. <ia...@no...>]

In message <3BC...@go...>, Eric Bezault
<er...@go...> writes
>So the question is: do you mind receiving messages about
>low level technical discussions of Gobo classes in
>'gobo-eiffel-develop'? Messages can be as interesting
>as discussing about the overall design of a cluster, or
>as borrowing as arguing how to indent an "if" instruction
>in a feature of a given class.
>
Fine by me. I am not in the Gobo team but I like to keep an eye on
what's going on - I can always skim stuff that's not of interest to me,

Regards, Ian Elliott

Re: [gobo-eiffel-develop] new mailing lists

[Eric B. <er...@go...>]

So far I only got Franck's and Ian's opinion. Following their
remarks I have disabled the new mailing lists from:

  https://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=24591

and we will use the gobo-eiffel-develop mailing list for our
implementation discussions. It will still be possible in the
future to enable again some of the specialized mailing lists
if necessary.

-- 
Eric Bezault
mailto:er...@go...
http://www.gobosoft.com