llvm dev - Nov 2019 - RFC: Moving toward Discord and Discourse for LLVM's discussions

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 2:49 PM Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> |  mailing lists for longer-form discussions are unfamiliar, difficult,
> and often intimidating for newcomers
>
>
>
> Um… what?  While I know (via my own children) that folks nowadays use
> multiple avenues of communication, it’s **really** hard to imagine email
> as a **mechanism** being unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating.  Moving to a
> new mechanism wouldn’t alter the fact of the very large number of strangers
> participating, which to my mind would be the
> unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating part.
>
> --paulr
>
Some cases I can think of here:
 - unclear how to reply to a mail that was sent before you subscribed to
the ML (obvious newbie problem - generally I'd lurk on the web until I
wanted to reply)
 - unclear how to create a partitioned space (new mailing list) for a topic
 - subscription state/bounce messages/moderation are all IMO unclear if you
haven't used mailman before
 - the volume of traffic on (effectively-mandatory) lists is so high that
it requires using mail filters, most people don't use those


(A weak +1 to the concern about this change being made by some people in a
conference room somewhere - if that's the decision-making process that's
fine with me, but it'd be great to know that and have a defined way to get
issues on the agenda)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191118/8e496c7d/attachment-0001.html>

+1 from me for the replacement of the mailing list by a web based forum

> On 18 Nov 2019, at 15:18, Sam McCall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 2:49 PM Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> |  mailing lists for longer-form discussions are unfamiliar, difficult, and
often intimidating for newcomers
> 
>  
> 
> Um… what?  While I know (via my own children) that folks nowadays use
multiple avenues of communication, it’s *really* hard to imagine email as a
*mechanism* being unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating.  Moving to a new mechanism
wouldn’t alter the fact of the very large number of strangers participating,
which to my mind would be the unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating part.
> 
> --paulr
> 
> Some cases I can think of here:
>  - unclear how to reply to a mail that was sent before you subscribed to
the ML (obvious newbie problem - generally I'd lurk on the web until I
wanted to reply)
>  - unclear how to create a partitioned space (new mailing list) for a topic
>  - subscription state/bounce messages/moderation are all IMO unclear if you
haven't used mailman before
>  - the volume of traffic on (effectively-mandatory) lists is so high that
it requires using mail filters, most people don't use those
> 
> 
> (A weak +1 to the concern about this change being made by some people in a
conference room somewhere - if that's the decision-making process that's
fine with me, but it'd be great to know that and have a defined way to get
issues on the agenda)
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191118/ac5afdc2/attachment.html>

> On Nov 18, 2019, at 6:18 AM, Sam McCall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> (A weak +1 to the concern about this change being made by some people in a
conference room somewhere - if that's the decision-making process that's
fine with me, but it'd be great to know that and have a defined way to get
issues on the agenda)

To make this 100% clear, this proposal came out of the Women in Compilers and
Tools Workshop and the LLVM Developers’ Meeting round tables. I feel both are
valid places to have discussions and to then present something to the community
for a larger discussion. Not everyone can attend a developer meeting, but it is
a great place to start discussions and one of the main goals of the meeting.

Thanks,
Tanya

On 2019-11-18 15:18, Sam McCall via llvm-dev wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 2:49 PM Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
>> |  mailing lists for longer-form discussions are unfamiliar, 
>> difficult,
>> and often intimidating for newcomers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Um… what?  While I know (via my own children) that folks nowadays use
>> multiple avenues of communication, it’s **really** hard to imagine 
>> email
>> as a **mechanism** being unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating.  Moving to 
>> a
>> new mechanism wouldn’t alter the fact of the very large number of 
>> strangers
>> participating, which to my mind would be the
>> unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating part.
>> 
>> --paulr
>> 
> Some cases I can think of here:
>  - unclear how to reply to a mail that was sent before you subscribed 
> to
> the ML (obvious newbie problem - generally I'd lurk on the web until I
> wanted to reply)
>  - unclear how to create a partitioned space (new mailing list) for a 
> topic
>  - subscription state/bounce messages/moderation are all IMO unclear if 
> you
> haven't used mailman before
I think that these are mostly problems with Mailman.  Some services 
(e.g. Sourcehut, see https://lists.sr.ht/) show a "Reply to" button
that
includes the correct In-Reply-To header and subject.  Sourcehut also 
makes creating lists very easy.
>  - the volume of traffic on (effectively-mandatory) lists is so high 
> that
> it requires using mail filters, most people don't use those
> 
> 
> (A weak +1 to the concern about this change being made by some people 
> in a
> conference room somewhere - if that's the decision-making process 
> that's
> fine with me, but it'd be great to know that and have a defined way to 
> get
> issues on the agenda)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

Switching our mailing lists from Mailman 2 to Mailman 3, instead of
switching to Discourse, might be a simpler change, and achieve some of the
benefits by providing the ability to interact via web forum. That said,
Discourse may well be a *better* option. (But I haven't actually used
Discourse yet much, so I can't really say for sure).

Quoting my comment from a previous time this subject was discussed:
> There's also mailman 3 which allows you to post from the
list-archive's
> website. (I personally find browsing a mailman 3 list archive completely
> maddening compared to mailman 2's pipermail archives -- something about
the
> thread layout just makes my eyes glaze over. But I guess some people like
> it, and it does allow posting.)


For an example, you can see:
<https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/>.
> Note that by default it's only showing you 10 of the lists, because I
guess
> pagination is supposed to be helpful. A good example list might be <
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev at python.org/>.


On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 4:04 PM Manuel Jacob via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 2019-11-18 15:18, Sam McCall via llvm-dev wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 2:49 PM Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <
> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> >> |  mailing lists for longer-form discussions are unfamiliar,
> >> difficult,
> >> and often intimidating for newcomers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Um… what?  While I know (via my own children) that folks nowadays
use
> >> multiple avenues of communication, it’s **really** hard to imagine
> >> email
> >> as a **mechanism** being unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating. 
Moving to
> >> a
> >> new mechanism wouldn’t alter the fact of the very large number of
> >> strangers
> >> participating, which to my mind would be the
> >> unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating part.
> >>
> >> --paulr
> >>
> > Some cases I can think of here:
> >  - unclear how to reply to a mail that was sent before you subscribed
> > to
> > the ML (obvious newbie problem - generally I'd lurk on the web
until I
> > wanted to reply)
> >  - unclear how to create a partitioned space (new mailing list) for a
> > topic
> >  - subscription state/bounce messages/moderation are all IMO unclear
if
> > you
> > haven't used mailman before
>
> I think that these are mostly problems with Mailman.  Some services
> (e.g. Sourcehut, see https://lists.sr.ht/) show a "Reply to"
button that
> includes the correct In-Reply-To header and subject.  Sourcehut also
> makes creating lists very easy.
>
> >  - the volume of traffic on (effectively-mandatory) lists is so high
> > that
> > it requires using mail filters, most people don't use those
> >
> >
> > (A weak +1 to the concern about this change being made by some people
> > in a
> > conference room somewhere - if that's the decision-making process
> > that's
> > fine with me, but it'd be great to know that and have a defined
way to
> > get
> > issues on the agenda)
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191118/d753f31f/attachment.html>