Fwd: {MOC Developers} HaaS: newdocs branch

[Ian Denhardt]

Forwarded message from Jason Hennessey (2014-11-12 19:49:41):
> Hey MOC developers
>
> Since we're making a bunch of changes to the documentation in
> preperation for HaaS v0.1, I figured it might be best to create a new
> branch where we can collaborate quickly for documentation without the
> overhead of the review process.
>
> To support that, I've created the "newdocs" branch on top of the main
> HaaS repo. Please feel free to push any improvements to the
> documentation there without worrying about reviews. Before we merge it
> back to devel, we will put it through the typical review process. I've
> already made some changes there to kick us off.
>
> If you do not have write access to the repo, make a pull request to it
> and let me know and I'll merge the change quickly.
>
> Thanks,
> Jason

Forwarding this to the technical list, where it belongs.

Since we don't have an outstanding pr for this work, let's conduct any
discussion here.

-Ian

[Jason Hennessey]

[re-added moc-developers]

My understanding was that moc-developers was for the MOC developers, and
technical was for something else.
Who, besides developers, would be interested in this development discussion?

In the grander scheme of things, we should probably decide on what
traffic is appropriate for which mailing lists. Since moc-technical is
our only one open to the world, I suspect there are non-technical folks
who just want to hear MOC-related announcements there.

My apologies for spamming folks, but it is in the interest of not
spamming you in the future :-)
Jason

[Ian Denhardt]

Quoting Jason Hennessey (2014-11-13 20:25:04)

> Who, besides developers, would be interested in this development discussion?

We're an open source project; to the extent that our development happens
online, we should be doing it out in the open. At some point
(supposedly soon) people outside of our local team are going to be
doing development work. Even in a case like this where people without
commit access can't directly use the same process that we are, it still
makes sense for them to know where the development is happening.

The split has always been:

* moc-developers: Things only of interest to those of us physically
present. Canonical use case is calling (mailing) in sick, but also
arranging meetings, or perhaps asking why publicly inaccessible
machine X is broken.
* moc-technical: Any and all discussions that may be of interest to
people outside our organization. This includes discussion of
development, for the reasons stated above.

> In the grander scheme of things, we should probably decide on what
> traffic is appropriate for which mailing lists. Since moc-technical is
> our only one open to the world, I suspect there are non-technical folks
> who just want to hear MOC-related announcements there.

We probably should have more than one mailing list -- there are a lot of
HaaS related things that have been posted recently, and that's high
traffic enough that it doesn't really make sense to send it to
*everyone* on moc-technical.

I'll be in around 11:00. See you all soon.

-Ian

[Krieger, Orran]

moc-developers is for calling in sick, asking who wants to go for lunch,
moc-technical is for any technical conversation.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MOC Developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to moc-developer...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to moc-dev...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/moc-developers.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jason Hennessey]

I suggest we might want to realign the naming to fit the uses then so that things like that are clear.

How about:

• moc-announce: public, low-traffic list for emails of general interest
• moc-technical: public catch-all list for public technical discussions
  
• haas: public list for HaaS development/discussions
  
• moc-internal: private list for internal things that shouldn't be public, like daily doldrum, (any potential) private repos, individual server configs or where we keep the pot of cloud-related gold.
  

What does everyone think?

[Ian Denhardt]

Quoting Jason Hennessey (2014-11-14 18:10:05)

> I suggest we might want to realign the naming to fit the uses then so
> that things like that are clear.
> How about:

> * moc-announce: public, low-traffic list for emails of general
> interest
> * moc-technical: public catch-all list for public technical
> discussions
> * haas: public list for HaaS development/discussions
> * moc-internal: private list for internal things that shouldn't be

> public, like daily doldrum, (any potential) private repos,
> individual server configs or where we keep the pot of cloud-related
> gold.
>
> What does everyone think?

This sounds sensible enough to me. I'm not sure we need to split out
announce/technical just yet -- besides the haas stuff both have been
pretty low-traffic.

That said, is anyone out there on the technical list bothered by the
quantity haas traffic?

Re: renaming moc-developers to moc-internal: is there a way to do this
transparently, such that we don't have to re-subscribe everyone?
Otherwise I don't think it's really worth the effort.

-Ian

[Krieger, Orran]

when the traffic is large enough to warrent, but not sure worth doing now.