Hey,
So I recently learned that no one on any of our plugins (Katello,
Discovery etc) can post to foreman-announce. This seems slightly
off-base to me, as I'd expect notable/popular plugins to be able to
use this channel.
Is this by design, or just an oversight? Have I missed something? Does
anyone have strong opinions either way? If not, I'd like to propose
that plugin authors can request access to post to that list (and we
can document it under our plugin guidelines ofc)
Cheers,
As a plugin author and maintainer, I would love to see this. A compromise
would be if the list was moderated for posts sent to it and plugin
announcements passed through. In the case of Katello for example, we rotate
who does a release and therefore each new releaser would need access to
post to the list.
Eric
Hey,
So I recently learned that no one on any of our plugins (Katello,
Discovery etc) can post to foreman-announce. This seems slightly
off-base to me, as I’d expect notable/popular plugins to be able to
use this channel.Is this by design, or just an oversight? Have I missed something? Does
anyone have strong opinions either way? If not, I’d like to propose
that plugin authors can request access to post to that list (and we
can document it under our plugin guidelines ofc)Cheers,
Greg
IRC: gwmngilfen–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
–
Eric D. Helms
Red Hat Engineering
Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University
I'd personally prefer to have a separate list for plugin announcements,
since there are usually multiple plugins released each week and the list
was announced as a low traffic list initially.
Something like Mailman's topic support would also probably work, but I
don't think that's possible with Google Groups.
–
Dominic Cleal
dominic@cleal.org
Dominic wrote:
> That's quite an increase to me,
Only as a percentage, not in absolute terms. We're talking a couple of
emails per week here, especially if we restrict to major releases,
rather than dev previews.
> especially for messages which aren't relevant to most of the subscribers.
I don't buy that argument. Most people don't install every plugin,
therefore most plugin releases are technically irrelevant to most
users. What's valuable is exposure to plugins they might not know
exist, especially if the cost is a minor increase in traffic in a way
which can be filtered if someone doesn't like it.
However…
I'm not hearing any support for a new mailing list, and about 50/50
for using either announce or users. I did some stats, at it seems we
have only about 50 members of -announce who are not also on -users.
Whilst, based on the above, I'd obviously prefer to reach as many
people as possible with news of plugins that may be of interest, the
numbers show that we are bikeshedding here 
Therefore, unless more people speak up to break the deadlock, I
propose status quo, with a minor modification of using subjects like
"[Plugin] …" in -users.
Greg
Side note: I'm not opposed to a survey on -announce, but we should
first decide if we even want to change the process 
> From: "Eric D Helms" <ericdhelms@gmail.com>
> To: "foreman-dev" <foreman-dev@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 10:38:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Plugin authors and announce-list
>
> As a plugin author and maintainer, I would love to see this. A compromise
> would be if the list was moderated for posts sent to it and plugin
> announcements passed through. In the case of Katello for example, we rotate
> who does a release and therefore each new releaser would need access to
> post to the list.
This would work, I like the idea of a moderated list, but with permissions
to approve wide enough that I don't have to wait for EMEA working hours.
Eric
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Greg Sutcliffe greg.sutcliffe@gmail.com > wrote:
Hey,
So I recently learned that no one on any of our plugins (Katello,
Discovery etc) can post to foreman-announce. This seems slightly
off-base to me, as I’d expect notable/popular plugins to be able to
use this channel.Is this by design, or just an oversight? Have I missed something? Does
anyone have strong opinions either way? If not, I’d like to propose
that plugin authors can request access to post to that list (and we
can document it under our plugin guidelines ofc)Cheers,
Greg
IRC: gwmngilfen–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.–
Eric D. Helms
Red Hat Engineering
Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> I'd personally prefer to have a separate list for plugin announcements,
> since there are usually multiple plugins released each week and the list
> was announced as a low traffic list initially.
5 or so emails per week is still low-traffic in my book (especially
compared to -dev and -users). I think keeping it on -announce is
better than fragmenting the information channels further, but that's
personal preference.
> Something like Mailman's topic support would also probably work, but I
> don't think that's possible with Google Groups.
Yeah, I don't think that's possible, although I'm starting to add
things like "[Event]" to Subject lines on the other lists now so that
people can write their own filters if they wish. There's also the
option to switch to a digest email if desired, which can be useful for
low-to-medium traffic lists (I find it backfires in high-traffic since
the digest becomes huge).
>> Hey,
>>
>> So I recently learned that no one on any of our plugins (Katello,
>> Discovery etc) can post to foreman-announce. This seems slightly
>> off-base to me, as I'd expect notable/popular plugins to be able to
>> use this channel.
>>
>> Is this by design, or just an oversight? Have I missed something? Does
>> anyone have strong opinions either way? If not, I'd like to propose
>> that plugin authors can request access to post to that list (and we
>> can document it under our plugin guidelines ofc)
So interestingly, I see the Discovery release went to announce list
earlier today - was that via moderation, or does Lukas already have
post permissions? If so, I guess my premise is wrong, although the
question of how to standardise for plugins in general remains
> I'd personally prefer to have a separate list for plugin announcements,
> since there are usually multiple plugins released each week and the list
> was announced as a low traffic list initially.
I take your point, but I'd argue that (a) even with plugins included,
it would still be single digits of emails per week, which is still
low-traffic to me, and (b) it's further fragmentation of our
communication channels. On that basis, I'd still argue for using
-announce rather than a new list. Moderation with reasonable sized
pool of approvers, as Stephen/Eric suggests would be fine by me
though.
> Something like Mailman's topic support would also probably work, but I
> don't think that's possible with Google Groups.
Yeah, that would be good, but not possible, as you say. I have started
using faux tags such as [Event] in my posts to -users so that people
can write their own filters - we could adopt a similar approach here,
uisng [Core] and [Plugin] or something similar.
Greg
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> So I recently learned that no one on any of our plugins (Katello,
>>> Discovery etc) can post to foreman-announce. This seems slightly
>>> off-base to me, as I'd expect notable/popular plugins to be able to
>>> use this channel.
>>>
>>> Is this by design, or just an oversight? Have I missed something? Does
>>> anyone have strong opinions either way? If not, I'd like to propose
>>> that plugin authors can request access to post to that list (and we
>>> can document it under our plugin guidelines ofc)
>
> So interestingly, I see the Discovery release went to announce list
> earlier today - was that via moderation, or does Lukas already have
> post permissions? If so, I guess my premise is wrong, although the
> question of how to standardise for plugins in general remains
Lukas has post permissions, probably from when he managed the Foreman
1.3.0 release, rather than for the Discovery plugin.
>> I'd personally prefer to have a separate list for plugin announcements,
>> since there are usually multiple plugins released each week and the list
>> was announced as a low traffic list initially.
>
> I take your point, but I'd argue that (a) even with plugins included,
> it would still be single digits of emails per week, which is still
> low-traffic to me
That's quite an increase to me, especially for messages which aren't
relevant to most of the subscribers.
I'd prefer a foreman-plugin-announce list still. This is a subject I
had been thinking of raising, but I was considering a one-off e-mail to
the announce list with a one question survey about the preferences of
the current subscriber base.
>> Something like Mailman's topic support would also probably work, but I
>> don't think that's possible with Google Groups.
>
> Yeah, that would be good, but not possible, as you say.
Minor correction, looking at help and the list settings, it has two
features - tagging and categories, but they only seem to be supported by
the web UI and not e-mail, like Mailman's.
–
Dominic Cleal
dominic@cleal.org
> I'd prefer a foreman-plugin-announce list still. This is a subject I
> had been thinking of raising, but I was considering a one-off e-mail to
> the announce list with a one question survey about the preferences of
> the current subscriber base.
For project of our size, I think one single announcement email is
enough. I am fine with moderating tho. Our poll showed that most of our
users deploy some plugins, so it is actually relevant to have them
there.
> Lukas has post permissions, probably from when he managed the Foreman
> 1.3.0 release, rather than for the Discovery plugin.
I should maybe consider dropping sending Discovery announcements on the
announce-list, user-list might be just enough. We can do the same for
other plugins.
The real problem I feel is the visibility of the things Foreman is really able
to do, and what are the new features coming with every release.
What about including the release notes of the plugins that get part of the
next release, in the announcement of the Foreman release itself? Most of
the users are probably not interested into every version of every
plugin that's getting released asynchronously (and folks that are interested
will find out there is a new version available). However, the Foreman
release event is a good way how to let the users know what are the features
they can start using, no matter if it's core or plugin.
Also, we could use the foreman-announce to advertise the newsletter, where
many of the news happening during last month, can be found.
– Ivan
----- Original Message -----
I’d prefer a foreman-plugin-announce list still. This is a subject I
had been thinking of raising, but I was considering a one-off e-mail to
the announce list with a one question survey about the preferences of
the current subscriber base.For project of our size, I think one single announcement email is
enough. I am fine with moderating tho. Our poll showed that most of our
users deploy some plugins, so it is actually relevant to have them
there.–
Later,
Lukas #lzap Zapletal–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
I like the idea of making plugins more visible, but looking at stats, announce
list has 208 members, while users list has 1744 members. I know that
announcement on user list might be overlooked easily, but I still see higher
chance of getting information to more users. Adding [pseudotags] could help.
So I'm ok with foreman-users which some authors already use. If it's agreed to
send plugin releases to announce list, I wouldn't spam users with every minor
bugfix release just with the big ones.
On Wednesday 21 of October 2015 06:01:20 Ivan Necas wrote:
From my experience, adding another mailing list seldom really solves
anything. The real problem I feel is the visibility of the things Foreman
is really able to do, and what are the new features coming with every
release.What about including the release notes of the plugins that get part of the
next release, in the announcement of the Foreman release itself? Most of
the users are probably not interested into every version of every
plugin that’s getting released asynchronously (and folks that are interested
will find out there is a new version available). However, the Foreman
release event is a good way how to let the users know what are the features
they can start using, no matter if it’s core or plugin.Also, we could use the foreman-announce to advertise the newsletter, where
many of the news happening during last month, can be found.– Ivan
----- Original Message -----
I’d prefer a foreman-plugin-announce list still. This is a subject I
had been thinking of raising, but I was considering a one-off e-mail to
the announce list with a one question survey about the preferences of
the current subscriber base.For project of our size, I think one single announcement email is
enough. I am fine with moderating tho. Our poll showed that most of our
users deploy some plugins, so it is actually relevant to have them
there.–
Later,Lukas #lzap Zapletal
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
–
Marek
> I like the idea of making plugins more visible, but looking at stats, announce
> list has 208 members, while users list has 1744 members. I know that
> announcement on user list might be overlooked easily, but I still see higher
> chance of getting information to more users. Adding [pseudotags] could help.
>
> So I'm ok with foreman-users which some authors already use. If it's agreed to
> send plugin releases to announce list, I wouldn't spam users with every minor
> bugfix release just with the big ones.
I like the idea of moderated announce-list with [tags] to allow
filtering for those that don't want to read about plugin news.
+1 for announcing only bigger releases too. After all there's monthly
newsletter that usually covers plugin releases that happened during the
month.
T.
–
MarekOn Wednesday 21 of October 2015 06:01:20 Ivan Necas wrote:
From my experience, adding another mailing list seldom really solves
anything. The real problem I feel is the visibility of the things Foreman
is really able to do, and what are the new features coming with every
release.What about including the release notes of the plugins that get part of the
next release, in the announcement of the Foreman release itself? Most of
the users are probably not interested into every version of every
plugin that’s getting released asynchronously (and folks that are interested
will find out there is a new version available). However, the Foreman
release event is a good way how to let the users know what are the features
they can start using, no matter if it’s core or plugin.Also, we could use the foreman-announce to advertise the newsletter, where
many of the news happening during last month, can be found.– Ivan
----- Original Message -----
I’d prefer a foreman-plugin-announce list still. This is a subject I
had been thinking of raising, but I was considering a one-off e-mail to
the announce list with a one question survey about the preferences of
the current subscriber base.For project of our size, I think one single announcement email is
enough. I am fine with moderating tho. Our poll showed that most of our
users deploy some plugins, so it is actually relevant to have them
there.–
Later,Lukas #lzap Zapletal
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.