[IDEA] Transition Google Groups to Slack/Gitter/Discourse
499 views
Skip to first unread message
Glenn Eggleton
May 27, 2016, 1:52:44 PM5/27/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
As a community member it seems like the secretaries don't have enough tools on google-groups to manage such a large user-base.
Would transitioning to something like Slack/Gitter/Discourse be a better option. Since Gitter integrates with GitHub, it seems like a logical next step.
Google groups works great for a small amount of people, but some of the discussions going on really could benefit from more organization.
Cheers,
Glenn
Woody Gilk
May 27, 2016, 2:18:36 PM5/27/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
I would absolutely agree with this, _except_ that Google Groups
provides a more complete historical record. Gitter does have unlimited
history, so maybe this a moot point.
--
Woody Gilk
http://about.me/shadowhand
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/8c8695fa-49c4-442a-9e95-2b8c85ca89b5%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
provides a more complete historical record. Gitter does have unlimited
history, so maybe this a moot point.
--
Woody Gilk
http://about.me/shadowhand
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/8c8695fa-49c4-442a-9e95-2b8c85ca89b5%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Andreas Heigl
May 27, 2016, 2:43:55 PM5/27/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
Hi All!
I'm strongly against the idea of moving a mailing-list to a chat-tool.
first of all, it's moving from a protocol-based messaging-medium to a
certain implementation where we will be dependent on the goodwill of the
service-provider. A group that proposes interfaces for interoperability
shouldn't depend on concrete implementations ;)
But in my eyes it's the difference between pull and push-notification.
While currently we have a Mailing-List, where I'm getting the
information pushed I will have to actively go to the chat to see whats
going on there. Gitter can notify me of new chats, but every sane person
will deactivate that feature on a very active chat.
Which brings me to the next point. Moving from a Mailing-List to a chat
will increase the number of messages due to the nature of a chat. I'm
not convinced that that will improve the informations discussed then.
And it will be very complicated to have threads in a chat. You can open
up a channel for a thread but tht will not really improve readability.
So to get down to the point: What actually is the issue with the
mailinglist/GoogleGroups? Is it really the user-base? Or is it a certain
"messyness"? Perhaps we can first try to analyze what exactly the issue
is, before we throw some technology at it.
But that's just my 2 cent.
Cheers
Andreas
Am 27.05.16 um 20:17 schrieb Woody Gilk:
--
,,,
(o o)
+---------------------------------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-+
| Andreas Heigl |
| mailto:and...@heigl.org N 50°22'59.5" E 08°23'58" |
| http://andreas.heigl.org http://hei.gl/wiFKy7 |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| http://hei.gl/root-ca |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
I'm strongly against the idea of moving a mailing-list to a chat-tool.
first of all, it's moving from a protocol-based messaging-medium to a
certain implementation where we will be dependent on the goodwill of the
service-provider. A group that proposes interfaces for interoperability
shouldn't depend on concrete implementations ;)
But in my eyes it's the difference between pull and push-notification.
While currently we have a Mailing-List, where I'm getting the
information pushed I will have to actively go to the chat to see whats
going on there. Gitter can notify me of new chats, but every sane person
will deactivate that feature on a very active chat.
Which brings me to the next point. Moving from a Mailing-List to a chat
will increase the number of messages due to the nature of a chat. I'm
not convinced that that will improve the informations discussed then.
And it will be very complicated to have threads in a chat. You can open
up a channel for a thread but tht will not really improve readability.
So to get down to the point: What actually is the issue with the
mailinglist/GoogleGroups? Is it really the user-base? Or is it a certain
"messyness"? Perhaps we can first try to analyze what exactly the issue
is, before we throw some technology at it.
But that's just my 2 cent.
Cheers
Andreas
Am 27.05.16 um 20:17 schrieb Woody Gilk:
,,,
(o o)
+---------------------------------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-+
| Andreas Heigl |
| mailto:and...@heigl.org N 50°22'59.5" E 08°23'58" |
| http://andreas.heigl.org http://hei.gl/wiFKy7 |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| http://hei.gl/root-ca |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Matt Trask
May 27, 2016, 3:42:28 PM5/27/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
+1 to Andreas' point.
Jake A. Smith
May 27, 2016, 7:16:30 PM5/27/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
Another +1 to Andreas' reply, but I'd also add that chats tend to flow freely from topic to topic in a way that email generally does not. Yes, there are exceptions but it's easier to spot and correct in email threads. In any sort of chat environment it's much harder to keep individual channels/topics on track and even harder to reference particular threads. Trying to combat this by creating a new channel for every topic only compounds the problem leading to situations where it's impossible to find where a conversation originated unless you happen to know an exact date and time or some accidentally unique string from the conversation with which to search for the topic.
As someone in the community who generally only lurks and catches up way after the fact I very much appreciate the mailing list and would be disappointed to see the FIG move to something less structured.
JS
_____________________________
From: Matt Trask <mjft...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 14:42
Subject: Re: [IDEA] Transition Google Groups to Slack/Gitter/Discourse
To: PHP Framework Interoperability Group <php...@googlegroups.com>
From: Matt Trask <mjft...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 14:42
Subject: Re: [IDEA] Transition Google Groups to Slack/Gitter/Discourse
To: PHP Framework Interoperability Group <php...@googlegroups.com>
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/e7085e5a-3ca0-44e4-b573-dedfc5ca7d3a%40googlegroups.com.
Stefano Torresi
May 27, 2016, 8:44:09 PM5/27/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
FWIW I see a web forum with per-thread email subscriptions as the only real alternative to the ML, but this idea has been proposed before and it hasn't received warm reactions.
We already have an IRC channel for real-time comms.
We already have an IRC channel for real-time comms.
Woody Gilk
May 27, 2016, 9:47:48 PM5/27/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Stefano Torresi <ste...@torresi.io> wrote:
> We already have an IRC channel for real-time comms.
Maybe it's time to replace IRC with Gitter?
> We already have an IRC channel for real-time comms.
Where are the IRC logs stored?
Andreas Heigl
May 28, 2016, 4:24:26 AM5/28/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
Hey Woody,
Am 28.05.16 um 03:47 schrieb Woody Gilk:
see wht the issues are before we throw terch at something we'Re not sure
about.
Is there need to archive them? For what amount of time? Why? And I'm not
talking about what might be standing in any bylaws but your opinion on it.
Cheers
Andreas
Am 28.05.16 um 03:47 schrieb Woody Gilk:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Stefano Torresi <ste...@torresi.io> wrote:
>> We already have an IRC channel for real-time comms.
>
> Maybe it's time to replace IRC with Gitter?
Why? What is the problem with IRC? As I stated before, we should first
>> We already have an IRC channel for real-time comms.
>
> Maybe it's time to replace IRC with Gitter?
see wht the issues are before we throw terch at something we'Re not sure
about.
>
> Where are the IRC logs stored?
That's an interesting question. What are those logs actually needed for?
> Where are the IRC logs stored?
Is there need to archive them? For what amount of time? Why? And I'm not
talking about what might be standing in any bylaws but your opinion on it.
Cheers
Andreas
Woody Gilk
May 28, 2016, 12:41:23 PM5/28/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 3:24 AM, Andreas Heigl <and...@heigl.org> wrote:
> That's an interesting question. What are those logs actually needed for?
> Is there need to archive them? For what amount of time? Why? And I'm not
> talking about what might be standing in any bylaws but your opinion on it.
It seems to me it would be good for transparency to have a public log
> That's an interesting question. What are those logs actually needed for?
> Is there need to archive them? For what amount of time? Why? And I'm not
> talking about what might be standing in any bylaws but your opinion on it.
of chat conversations. I had no idea there was an IRC channel, and I
don't use IRC, but if I heard about a particular conversation of
interest I would want to look at the logs.
Glenn Eggleton
May 29, 2016, 12:17:16 AM5/29/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
out of interest, the #php-fig channel on freenode is invite only.
Woody Gilk
May 29, 2016, 6:55:55 AM5/29/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
That actually makes my comments more relevant. There is a closed room that has no archive?!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/53887094-9b3d-4e6c-9dc1-8e75d9dddeb7%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Stefano Torresi
May 29, 2016, 7:15:42 AM5/29/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
the actual channel on freenode is #phpfig and it is public
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAGOJM6J0Y4cgsc6Hg_UGbpwRs8SJ0Ma_xQD-yojr9ELiBwpFeg%40mail.gmail.com.
Jason Coward
May 29, 2016, 8:31:12 AM5/29/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
the actual channel on freenode is #phpfig and it is public
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAFojS1v2ZtFhywy_UUoBp-MUhdim8RYmxUkn3WHAtgLRfANqvg%40mail.gmail.com.
That actually makes my comments more relevant. There is a closed room that has no archive?!
----
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAGOJM6J0Y4cgsc6Hg_UGbpwRs8SJ0Ma_xQD-yojr9ELiBwpFeg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
out of interest, the #php-fig channel on freenode is invite only.--
On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 12:41:23 PM UTC-4, Woody Gilk wrote:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/53887094-9b3d-4e6c-9dc1-8e75d9dddeb7%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Slim
Framework
Jason Coward
Andreas Heigl
May 29, 2016, 8:45:33 AM5/29/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
Hi Jason.
It's a chat. There usually isn't a reason for a log. If the participants
in a chat think that their recent contributions are so important that it
should be preserved for future reference, the relevant part of the chat
is usually copied and preserved somewhere else.
Technicaly it is no problem to start logging a chat right away, but the
main question for me still is: Why do you think that it might as well
not exist if there are no logs?
Cheers
Andreas
Am 29.05.16 um 14:31 schrieb Jason Coward:
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAGOJM6J0Y4cgsc6Hg_UGbpwRs8SJ0Ma_xQD-yojr9ELiBwpFeg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/53887094-9b3d-4e6c-9dc1-8e75d9dddeb7%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> *Jason Coward*
> Slim Framework
It's a chat. There usually isn't a reason for a log. If the participants
in a chat think that their recent contributions are so important that it
should be preserved for future reference, the relevant part of the chat
is usually copied and preserved somewhere else.
Technicaly it is no problem to start logging a chat right away, but the
main question for me still is: Why do you think that it might as well
not exist if there are no logs?
Cheers
Andreas
Am 29.05.16 um 14:31 schrieb Jason Coward:
> If there are no logs, it might as well not exist.
>> Stefano Torresi <mailto:ste...@torresi.io>
>> May 29, 2016 at 5:15 AM
>> the actual channel on freenode is #phpfig and it is public
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com>.
>> the actual channel on freenode is #phpfig and it is public
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
>> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:php...@googlegroups.com>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAFojS1v2ZtFhywy_UUoBp-MUhdim8RYmxUkn3WHAtgLRfANqvg%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAFojS1v2ZtFhywy_UUoBp-MUhdim8RYmxUkn3WHAtgLRfANqvg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAFojS1v2ZtFhywy_UUoBp-MUhdim8RYmxUkn3WHAtgLRfANqvg%40mail.gmail.com
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> Woody Gilk <mailto:woody...@gmail.com>
>> May 29, 2016 at 4:55 AM
>>
>> That actually makes my comments more relevant. There is a closed room
>> that has no archive?!
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Woody Gilk
>> http://about.me/shadowhand
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com>.
>>
>> That actually makes my comments more relevant. There is a closed room
>> that has no archive?!
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Woody Gilk
>> http://about.me/shadowhand
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
>> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:php...@googlegroups.com>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAGOJM6J0Y4cgsc6Hg_UGbpwRs8SJ0Ma_xQD-yojr9ELiBwpFeg%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAGOJM6J0Y4cgsc6Hg_UGbpwRs8SJ0Ma_xQD-yojr9ELiBwpFeg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> Glenn Eggleton <mailto:gegg...@gmail.com>
>> May 28, 2016 at 10:17 PM
>> out of interest, the #php-fig channel on freenode is invite only.
>>
>> On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 12:41:23 PM UTC-4, Woody Gilk wrote:
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com>.
>> out of interest, the #php-fig channel on freenode is invite only.
>>
>> On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 12:41:23 PM UTC-4, Woody Gilk wrote:
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
>> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:php...@googlegroups.com>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/53887094-9b3d-4e6c-9dc1-8e75d9dddeb7%40googlegroups.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/53887094-9b3d-4e6c-9dc1-8e75d9dddeb7%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> *Jason Coward*
> Slim Framework
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com>.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:php...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/574AE109.2040603%40opengeek.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/574AE109.2040603%40opengeek.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
Jason Coward
May 29, 2016, 9:50:47 AM5/29/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
There is no benefit to private
communications in a public standards group. The knowledge is lost.
Hi Jason.
It's a chat. There usually isn't a reason for a log. If the participants
in a chat think that their recent contributions are so important that it
should be preserved for future reference, the relevant part of the chat
is usually copied and preserved somewhere else.
Technicaly it is no problem to start logging a chat right away, but the
main question for me still is: Why do you think that it might as well
not exist if there are no logs?
Cheers
Andreas
If there are no logs, it might as well not exist.
May 29, 2016 at 5:15 AM
the actual channel on freenode is #phpfig and it is public
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAFojS1v2ZtFhywy_UUoBp-MUhdim8RYmxUkn3WHAtgLRfANqvg%40mail.gmail.com.
--
Slim
Framework
Jason Coward
Matteo Beccati
May 30, 2016, 6:04:53 AM5/30/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
Hi,
FWIW, I have most of the IRC logs since Fri Sep 12 13:12:55 2014
I'm mostly connected 24/7, but something might have been missed the few
times this pc was turned off or x-chat not started after a reboot. Znc
should have helped in that case by re-sending (some of) the history, but
I haven't checked.
Cheers
Matteo Beccati
Development & Consulting - http://www.beccati.com/
FWIW, I have most of the IRC logs since Fri Sep 12 13:12:55 2014
I'm mostly connected 24/7, but something might have been missed the few
times this pc was turned off or x-chat not started after a reboot. Znc
should have helped in that case by re-sending (some of) the history, but
I haven't checked.
Cheers
Development & Consulting - http://www.beccati.com/
Michael Cullum
May 30, 2016, 7:05:32 AM5/30/16
to PHP FIG
If people want we (the secretaries) will be happy to look into implementing some kind of irc logging solution (suggestions welcome) but the general unwritten rule is that discussions on irc should be summarised elsewhere afterwards if they are important.
--
Michael
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/b32e715e-3b3b-05eb-f7c4-a472f900ce53%40beccati.com.
Andreas Heigl
May 30, 2016, 8:01:16 AM5/30/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
I personally still can't see *why* there is need for logging the chat as that summary (and when it's simply copypasting the log from the IRC-client of a participant) on the mailinglist is what I also had in mind. For me a chat is an informal gathering and having it logged to a publicly available part of the internet would for me mean that I need to be informed about it before I start chatting. So a note in the channel-topic should be set.
Just my 0.02€
Cheers
Andreas
PS: @michael Yesterday I started building a logger-plugin to phergie that should be able to log the chat to a file. Details have to be worked out yet, but I'm hoping to get that finished by friday.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/CAAqcDMhf%2BFTmzPryPTVz6Q-oSpioYd%2B0jMWFqdRgKKGu08W56g%40mail.gmail.com.
Phil Sturgeon
May 30, 2016, 8:09:14 AM5/30/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
There are pros and cons to all medium of course.
We already have IRC, and that is where people are meant to go for back and forth. Plenty of times members have done this where there is a lot of points to be worked through, then they come back here and post the summary of the results.
Recently, some people are not doing that.
IRC is ok, and Slack is a fancy IRC, but chat and mailing lists are two different things.
The mailing list helps keep everyone up to date, but that assumes that a) what people are saying is relevant to the majority of people, and b) people are signing up that are interested in the majority of content.
Neither A or B has been true recently either.
If people can keep their posts on point, handle their email filters if they only have narrow interests in topics, make sure new threads are tagged accordingly, keep to self-throttling, and move to #phpfig on freenode when you really need a chat, then the mailing list is just fine.
Linking to threads has proven very useful when people come in with no context and propose things that have been discussed in length a year or two ago. :)
Dracony
May 30, 2016, 4:53:08 PM5/30/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
Logging seems like the peak of bureacracy to me. Posting a summary is enough. As for the chat system I'd really prefer Gitter. It's free, integrates nicely with github repos (which we have) and also sends email transcripts in case you miss something.
Matthieu Napoli
May 30, 2016, 5:05:01 PM5/30/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
Hi everyone,
For what it's worth, our experience with Gitter for container-interop and PSR-11 related discussions has been great. It's a good additions to GitHub discussions (which are used like the FIG mailing list for persistent discussions), and to keep up to date between contributors. I feel like it's really helping.
Now I don't work for Gitter and I don't have money in it, but:
- Gitter supports IRC (https://irc.gitter.im/), so to me "I prefer IRC" is not an argument, it's not mutually exclusive
- it's logged/searchable
- it's publicly readable, and only requires a GitHub account to participate (whereas Slack requires to register)
- it supports Markdown (all the Github style extensions), which is tremendously helpful to discuss about code
If you have never used it you should at least consider it. IRC doesn't have "problems that needs to be solved", but it shouldn't prevent us to consider better solutions. I personally don't go much on IRC because it just sucks IMO. Using Gitter can help bring community members together (and avoid flooding the mailing list at some points). Again to prove my point, it has helped a great deal to keep PSR-11 and container-interop moving forward and I'm personally convinced it can also help other PSRs.
My 2c, I hope that we can move beyond the status quo.
Matthieu
Andreas Heigl
May 31, 2016, 4:17:50 AM5/31/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
Hi Matthieu.
Am 30.05.16 um 23:05 schrieb Matthieu Napoli:
when it's done in a way that is coupled to that PR. SO why not use
Gitter there. But as a chat for the whole of FIG is not necessarily even
tied to Github I think a "vendor-independent" chat works best.
a certain vendor. I can use my IRC-Client to connect to a gitter chat
(not the other way around btw.) but the chat server is still operated by
an entity that I do not have any control over whatsoever.
> - it's logged/searchable
I still haven't heard of whether that is a must have for a chat for the
FIG group. As Michael Cullum just recently pointed out the (yes,
unwritten) rule is that as soon as something "important" or "relevant"
(yes, who defines that) happens on the Chat, that part is either copied
or summarized onto the mailinglist for further searchability
> - it's publicly readable, and only requires a GitHub account to
> participate (whereas Slack requires to register)
So it's actually not publicly readable. You need to have a
github-account to participate. No github, no gitter. For IRC btw. you
don't actually need to register, just connect to an IRC-Server with a
nickname that's not been taken and go...
> - it supports Markdown (all the Github style extensions), which is
> tremendously helpful to discuss about code
As I said above, it might be the right tool for the right job when
discussing about an actual PSR. But that's not the only point we're
talking about here.
And so I also do know about the shortcommings of it. And in my eyes it
is not "the better solution" as long as we don't even know what we want
to solve. If the issue is logging the chat, there are solutions around
that have not been implemented for a reason. And if it's just because
IRC "sucks", fine, that's a valid personal feeling, but we shouldn't try
to find the best solution to a problem based on a personal feeling. BTW:
I'd personally really like to know why IRC sucks in your opinion, but
please let's not discuss that on the ML. If you want to you can ping me
on https://gitter.im/heiglandreas
So sorry for again raising the question (rephrased this time):
- What issues can be solved by moving the current Communication
channels of the FIG to a different setup?
Cheers,
Andreas
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/cd0ec73d-06fe-4116-8ee0-78a20e0f12b4%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
Am 30.05.16 um 23:05 schrieb Matthieu Napoli:
> Hi everyone,
>
> For what it's worth, our experience with Gitter for container-interop
> and PSR-11 related discussions has been great. It's a good additions to
> GitHub discussions (which are used like the FIG mailing list for
> persistent discussions), and to keep up to date between contributors. I
> feel like it's really helping.
Personally I think a chat related to a certain PR makes absolutely sense
>
> For what it's worth, our experience with Gitter for container-interop
> and PSR-11 related discussions has been great. It's a good additions to
> GitHub discussions (which are used like the FIG mailing list for
> persistent discussions), and to keep up to date between contributors. I
> feel like it's really helping.
when it's done in a way that is coupled to that PR. SO why not use
Gitter there. But as a chat for the whole of FIG is not necessarily even
tied to Github I think a "vendor-independent" chat works best.
>
> Now I don't work for Gitter and I don't have money in it, but:
>
> - Gitter supports IRC (https://irc.gitter.im/), so to me "I prefer IRC"
> is not an argument, it's not mutually exclusive
It's not about what one prefers but whether one wants to be depending on
> Now I don't work for Gitter and I don't have money in it, but:
>
> - Gitter supports IRC (https://irc.gitter.im/), so to me "I prefer IRC"
> is not an argument, it's not mutually exclusive
a certain vendor. I can use my IRC-Client to connect to a gitter chat
(not the other way around btw.) but the chat server is still operated by
an entity that I do not have any control over whatsoever.
> - it's logged/searchable
I still haven't heard of whether that is a must have for a chat for the
FIG group. As Michael Cullum just recently pointed out the (yes,
unwritten) rule is that as soon as something "important" or "relevant"
(yes, who defines that) happens on the Chat, that part is either copied
or summarized onto the mailinglist for further searchability
> - it's publicly readable, and only requires a GitHub account to
> participate (whereas Slack requires to register)
github-account to participate. No github, no gitter. For IRC btw. you
don't actually need to register, just connect to an IRC-Server with a
nickname that's not been taken and go...
> - it supports Markdown (all the Github style extensions), which is
> tremendously helpful to discuss about code
discussing about an actual PSR. But that's not the only point we're
talking about here.
>
> If you have never used it you should at least consider it. IRC doesn't
> have "problems that needs to be solved", but it shouldn't prevent us to
> consider better solutions. I personally don't go much on IRC because it
> just sucks IMO. Using Gitter can help bring community members together
> (and avoid flooding the mailing list at some points). Again to prove my
> point, it has helped a great deal to keep PSR-11 and container-interop
> moving forward and I'm personally convinced it can also help other PSRs.
I've been using Gitter for some time now to support different libraries.
> If you have never used it you should at least consider it. IRC doesn't
> have "problems that needs to be solved", but it shouldn't prevent us to
> consider better solutions. I personally don't go much on IRC because it
> just sucks IMO. Using Gitter can help bring community members together
> (and avoid flooding the mailing list at some points). Again to prove my
> point, it has helped a great deal to keep PSR-11 and container-interop
> moving forward and I'm personally convinced it can also help other PSRs.
And so I also do know about the shortcommings of it. And in my eyes it
is not "the better solution" as long as we don't even know what we want
to solve. If the issue is logging the chat, there are solutions around
that have not been implemented for a reason. And if it's just because
IRC "sucks", fine, that's a valid personal feeling, but we shouldn't try
to find the best solution to a problem based on a personal feeling. BTW:
I'd personally really like to know why IRC sucks in your opinion, but
please let's not discuss that on the ML. If you want to you can ping me
on https://gitter.im/heiglandreas
So sorry for again raising the question (rephrased this time):
- What issues can be solved by moving the current Communication
channels of the FIG to a different setup?
Cheers,
Andreas
>
> My 2c, I hope that we can move beyond the status quo.
>
> Matthieu
>
> Le lundi 30 mai 2016 14:09:14 UTC+2, Phil Sturgeon a écrit :
>
> There are pros and cons to all medium of course.
>
> We already have IRC, and that is where people are meant to go for
> back and forth. Plenty of times members have done this where there
> is a lot of points to be worked through, then they come back here
> and post the summary of the results.
>
> Recently, some people are not doing that.
>
> IRC is ok, and Slack is a fancy IRC, but chat and mailing lists are
> two different things.
>
> The mailing list helps keep everyone up to date, but that assumes
> that a) what people are saying is relevant to the majority of
> people, and b) people are signing up that are interested in the
> majority of content.
>
> Neither A or B has been true recently either.
>
> If people can keep their posts on point, handle their email filters
> if they only have narrow interests in topics, make sure new threads
> are tagged accordingly, keep to self-throttling, and move to #phpfig
> on freenode when you really need a chat, then the mailing list is
> just fine.
>
> Linking to threads has proven very useful when people come in with
> no context and propose things that have been discussed in length a
> year or two ago. :)
>
> My 2c, I hope that we can move beyond the status quo.
>
> Matthieu
>
> Le lundi 30 mai 2016 14:09:14 UTC+2, Phil Sturgeon a écrit :
>
> There are pros and cons to all medium of course.
>
> We already have IRC, and that is where people are meant to go for
> back and forth. Plenty of times members have done this where there
> is a lot of points to be worked through, then they come back here
> and post the summary of the results.
>
> Recently, some people are not doing that.
>
> IRC is ok, and Slack is a fancy IRC, but chat and mailing lists are
> two different things.
>
> The mailing list helps keep everyone up to date, but that assumes
> that a) what people are saying is relevant to the majority of
> people, and b) people are signing up that are interested in the
> majority of content.
>
> Neither A or B has been true recently either.
>
> If people can keep their posts on point, handle their email filters
> if they only have narrow interests in topics, make sure new threads
> are tagged accordingly, keep to self-throttling, and move to #phpfig
> on freenode when you really need a chat, then the mailing list is
> just fine.
>
> Linking to threads has proven very useful when people come in with
> no context and propose things that have been discussed in length a
> year or two ago. :)
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:php...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/cd0ec73d-06fe-4116-8ee0-78a20e0f12b4%40googlegroups.com
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:php-fig+u...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to php...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:php...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/cd0ec73d-06fe-4116-8ee0-78a20e0f12b4%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
Matthieu Napoli
May 31, 2016, 6:02:49 AM5/31/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
Hi Andreas,
> > - Gitter supports IRC (https://irc.gitter.im/), so to me "I prefer IRC"
> > is not an argument, it's not mutually exclusive
> It's not about what one prefers but whether one wants to be depending on
> a certain vendor. I can use my IRC-Client to connect to a gitter chat
> (not the other way around btw.) but the chat server is still operated by
> an entity that I do not have any control over whatsoever.
We are using a Google mailing list, GitHub hosting, Freenode IRC
servers, Packagist hosting, … I don't think being vendor agnostic is a
prerequisite in this organisation.
> > - it's logged/searchable
> I still haven't heard of whether that is a must have for a chat for the
> FIG group.
I didn't say it's a must have. Some people raised the fact that it could
be a good "plus" (which I agree), so I mentioned it.
> > - it's publicly readable, and only requires a GitHub account to
> > participate (whereas Slack requires to register)
> So it's actually not publicly readable.
Yes it is. Example:
https://gitter.im/container-interop/definition-interop
> You need to have a github-account to participate. No github, no gitter.
Reading ≠ participate. Our code is on GitHub so you also need a GitHub
account for sending pull requests/opening issues and that's fine with
everyone. GitHub accounts is a very low requirement.
> > - it supports Markdown (all the Github style extensions), which is
> > tremendously helpful to discuss about code
> As I said above, it might be the right tool for the right job when
> discussing about an actual PSR. But that's not the only point we're
> talking about here.
I'm not sure what you are getting at? It's nice when discussing code
(which happens often in the context of the FIG), so I just mention it as
it is. Yes it doesn't solve world hunger, but that doesn't prevent us
for considering those little benefits, and that doesn't make them less
interesting.
> - What issues can be solved by moving the current Communication
> channels of the FIG to a different setup?
Focusing only on "issues" is a good way to never improve ("never fix
what's not broken"). The question I'm raising is: "what could we gain VS
what could we loose?" And I believe I have answered that question: we
gain a few practical details + potentially more engagement in the
community, we don't loose much (we would be tied to Gitter, just like we
are tied already to Github, Packagist, Google, Freenode, etc.).
Matthieu Napoli
> > - Gitter supports IRC (https://irc.gitter.im/), so to me "I prefer IRC"
> > is not an argument, it's not mutually exclusive
> It's not about what one prefers but whether one wants to be depending on
> a certain vendor. I can use my IRC-Client to connect to a gitter chat
> (not the other way around btw.) but the chat server is still operated by
> an entity that I do not have any control over whatsoever.
servers, Packagist hosting, … I don't think being vendor agnostic is a
prerequisite in this organisation.
> > - it's logged/searchable
> I still haven't heard of whether that is a must have for a chat for the
> FIG group.
be a good "plus" (which I agree), so I mentioned it.
> > - it's publicly readable, and only requires a GitHub account to
> > participate (whereas Slack requires to register)
> So it's actually not publicly readable.
https://gitter.im/container-interop/definition-interop
> You need to have a github-account to participate. No github, no gitter.
account for sending pull requests/opening issues and that's fine with
everyone. GitHub accounts is a very low requirement.
> > - it supports Markdown (all the Github style extensions), which is
> > tremendously helpful to discuss about code
> As I said above, it might be the right tool for the right job when
> discussing about an actual PSR. But that's not the only point we're
> talking about here.
(which happens often in the context of the FIG), so I just mention it as
it is. Yes it doesn't solve world hunger, but that doesn't prevent us
for considering those little benefits, and that doesn't make them less
interesting.
> - What issues can be solved by moving the current Communication
> channels of the FIG to a different setup?
what's not broken"). The question I'm raising is: "what could we gain VS
what could we loose?" And I believe I have answered that question: we
gain a few practical details + potentially more engagement in the
community, we don't loose much (we would be tied to Gitter, just like we
are tied already to Github, Packagist, Google, Freenode, etc.).
Matthieu Napoli
Barry vd. Heuvel
May 31, 2016, 8:32:57 AM5/31/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
If you are using a chatservice like Gitter/Slack, it will probably be a lot harder to follow (especially for bystanders like me, who don't check in every day) and will probably increase the noise.
Barry
Op dinsdag 31 mei 2016 12:02:49 UTC+2 schreef Matthieu Napoli:
Can't you move the discussions entirely to Github? Instead of just the code discussions, because now conversations are already split between PR's and this maillist.
Similar to Google Groups:
- Notifications by email, possibility to unsubscribe
- Threads (vs Github issues)
- Can lock threads/issues
- Easy to subscribe/watch
- Searchable
Pros:
- Can assign people for certain issues
- Ping users for feedback directly with mentions
- Attach labels/milestones for filtering
- Can open threads for just maintainers (votes for members only?)
- Same medium as the code pull requests, easy linking
- Emojis for likes/dislikes etc
Cons:
- Need a Github account, but who doesn't have that?
Barry
Op dinsdag 31 mei 2016 12:02:49 UTC+2 schreef Matthieu Napoli:
Woody Gilk
May 31, 2016, 8:40:03 AM5/31/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Barry vd. Heuvel <barr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can't you move the discussions entirely to Github?
This would be great, imo.
> Can't you move the discussions entirely to Github?
Larry Garfield
May 31, 2016, 9:30:30 AM5/31/16
to php...@googlegroups.com
On 05/31/2016 07:32 AM, Barry vd. Heuvel wrote:
> If you are using a chatservice like Gitter/Slack, it will probably be
> a lot harder to follow (especially for bystanders like me, who don't
> check in every day) and will probably increase the noise.
>
> Can't you move the discussions entirely to Github? Instead of just the
> code discussions, because now conversations are already split between
> PR's and this maillist.
This has been discussed extensively in the past. We went the other
> If you are using a chatservice like Gitter/Slack, it will probably be
> a lot harder to follow (especially for bystanders like me, who don't
> check in every day) and will probably increase the noise.
>
> Can't you move the discussions entirely to Github? Instead of just the
> code discussions, because now conversations are already split between
> PR's and this maillist.
direction. Discussion belongs on the list, NOT ON GITHUB. GitHub is a
poor medium for many forms of discussion.
Yes, some people who have gotten involved in FIG more recently are going
to GitHub. We direct them back here.
PSA: If you're doing major discussion in a GitHub PR, you're doing it
wrong. The secretaries have been and will continue to lock GitHub
threads to prevent that, because we do not want to have the conversation
split.
For example, until this thread I had NFI where any of the container work
was happening, just that there's occasionally a blog post about stuff
that's happened that I have no visibility into at all. There's no
discoverability for those who want to get involved. That's why we have
said, repeatedly, that such discussions belong here, on the list. If we
get too much technical activity (it would be a blessing), then we should
spin up dedicated lists for each WG that we can also advertise. (A few
topics had these in the past.)
--Larry Garfield
Woody Gilk
May 31, 2016, 10:37:24 AM5/31/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
Yes, some people who have gotten involved in FIG more recently are going to GitHub. We direct them back here.
If people are trying to get involved and are choosing to use Github, doesn't that mean it feels better for those people?
PSA: If you're doing major discussion in a GitHub PR, you're doing it wrong. The secretaries have been and will continue to lock GitHub threads to prevent that, because we do not want to have the conversation split.
This seems like it points problems with using the ML, which is creating an unnecessary amount of work for FIG members and secretaries. If all the discussion and work happened on Github, there would only be one source of truth and no need to "educate" people about how to operate.
Since this is a standards body that produces documents, I can think of very few discussions that shouldn't be related to actual documents. Adding a new member? Use issues for voting lock the voting threads. Members have write access and will still be able to vote, but the public will be excluded. This is actually _better_ than the current ML process where sometimes public users post on a voting thread (I've made this mistake myself) which then results in extra work explaining the rules.
tl;dr: there seem to be clear benefits to using Github over Google Groups which should be revisited by FIG.
Glenn Eggleton
May 31, 2016, 11:15:00 AM5/31/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
I agree with Woody,
The mailing list cannot be the one source of truth since the project lives on GitHub to begin with.
PR comments are exactly where discussions should be happening.
I am sorry that you don't see it that way.
Matthieu Napoli
Jun 1, 2016, 1:10:20 PM6/1/16
to PHP Framework Interoperability Group
Hi Larry,
For example, until this thread I had NFI where any of the container work
was happening, just that there's occasionally a blog post about stuff
that's happened that I have no visibility into at all. There's no
discoverability for those who want to get involved. That's why we have
said, repeatedly, that such discussions belong here, on the list. If we
get too much technical activity (it would be a blessing), then we should
spin up dedicated lists for each WG that we can also advertise. (A few
topics had these in the past.)
Just to answer this, it seems you raise 2 problems:
- no news about PSR-11
We have been posting regular updates: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/php-fig/psr-11%7Csort:date
If we take the last update as an example (mid-april), we took several hours to summarize as best as we could what we did and were we are: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/php-fig/xsY8bRG5K0M/CH0ZHxe2BAAJ
We do not get a lot of answers unfortunately, so we try to keep motivation to write these emails as often as we can (and when we have some new things to share of course). Do you think we should post more updates or less? Are you personally interested?
- you want people to use the mailing list
We are working on a specific repository, with code. We discuss in pull requests, in the code, and in Gitter for day-to-day talk. Just because we find it more practical, and we prefer it. If anyone actually involved in PSR-11/container-interop suggested it, we could consider something else of course. But we get far more discussions on GitHub (and I guess it's because 1) that mailing list is noisy, and 2) we are discussing code so it's more convenient).
But to clear things up: we report important chat discussions to the main medium (we respect that rule a lot because it makes sense). And we always report summaries to the mailing list. I believe it's a good compromise, it works well for now. Everything on the ML would not work as well.
Cheers
Matthieu Napoli
PS: if "NFI" means "No Fucking Idea" I think you can convey the same meaning with better words. If it meant something else, my apologies.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages