Communications 2.0

[Tim]

On 03/05/16 23:30, Narcis Garcia wrote:
> "central visible list of tasks that need doing"
> +1
>
> "IRC channel is largely dominated by people leaving/joining message"
> I think it's optional in all IRC clients.
> I don't like IRC, but it has strong advantages (and neutrality) *when
> live conversation is needed*.
>
>
> Arguments I hear for moving to proprietary SaaS often match arguments to
> use "official" channels in Facebook, including the acceptance by new
> users and being friendly to them.
What is the point in comparing proprietary Saas to Proprietary Facebook?
> This issue has been on the table since any conversation about GNU/Linux
> and FOSS applications. It's not invalid, but some people uses it as the
> only important variable.
I warned at the very start this is not to become about Proprietary vs FOSS. Its about what is the best solution. I will let you off since you
were very civil in your reasoning, however we have a number of variables in play:

- Primary one being, what best serves the needs of our users and core team members, and is easiest to use, most are not developers and wont want
to use a site with steep learning curve (as seen with the wiki!)
- We do not have a trusted experienced sysadmin to maintain a self-hosted FOSS solution, one that we can be sure that will keep up with security
updates and maintenance for the future.
- Anything hosted on Canonical IS, needs to go through a comprehensive code review, that could take a year or more for some of these webapps!
- There are really no (or very few) cost effective hosted FOSS solutions.
- In many cases the SaaS solutions are just easier to use (not surprising, they probably have dozens more developers, designers etc working on
the product)

 
>
> Most notable projects become notable because of consistency in
> principles, strategies and aims in the long term.
I am not even sure what you are getting at here?
>
>
> El 03/05/16 a les 12:35, Tim ha escrit:
>>
>> On 03/05/16 19:44, Jasper Backer wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03-05-16 09:59, Tim wrote:
>>>> Yes but we half half a dozen core team members mostly team leaders who have refused to use IRC (for years), yet have embraced slack. The invite
>>>> situation is crap, but there are ways around that (auto-invite scripts). I think using IRC is less critical for the teams that don't really have
>>>> to interact with the rest of the Ubuntu Sphere. We can also potentially bridge the two channels using a bot also. And at the end of the day if
>>>> it really takes of we can move to matterhost, so long as we can arrange hosting.
>>> Hmm. Maybe bridging the two together would work, but I wouldn't use the current existing channels for that (e.g. open new channels for the
>>> integration so one can choose which one to join).
>> Its probably ok, its not there is a huge amount of traffic on either, The IRC channel is largely dominated by people leaving/joining message
>> (hopefully they wouldnt appear on slack?)
>>>> If you joined the list today, you would need to import the archives into your email client, certainly possible with Thunderbird, no idea if its
>>>> possible with webmail like gmail. And clearly not obvious for someone who is new to email lists!
>>> Yup. Valid point. I don't care too much for 'directly accessible' history though, if I need something, a web search often also indexes these
>>> historical mails.
>> I hit email list archives of google and its a pita to go through the web interface to follow the thread, I often just import the archives and do
>> it that way
>>>> You did see the mock-ups in the other email right?
>>>> https://www.behance.net/gallery/35183935/ubuntugnomeorg-the-redesign-V2
>>> That does look super nice. :) Very slick.
>>> Then it is what it is, I assume. Maybe some wrong wording by me here, I meant slack = closed (as in, requires invite etc), Discourse is
>>> accessible a lot easier.
>> As mentioned slack invite situation can be dealt with, but not worth the effort while we are really just trialling it. Other projects just have
>> a webform, submit email and you are invited ;) The scripts are out there so wouldn't be much to setup one.
>>>> I think most of the 'unwelcoming' goes towards new users that come in and suggest massive changes to the project. They then go on a trolling
>>>> rage when they don't get their way. Part of my thinking if would be much easier for new contributors if there was a central visible list of
>>>> tasks that need doing. They can start small, become known/respected amongst the community and then work there way up though the community if
>>>> they are so inclined.
>>> Hmm if that's really happening, that's quite sad. "unwelcoming" in the sense of "too many unclear hoops to jump through" in my case.
>> It happens, there have been a number of instances of trolling on this list, that just got way out of control, like last time we discussed
>> trialling slack, we tried to be nice to them at the start. More recently, like last week, a number of g+ threads went south with speculation
>> that Ubuntu GNOME has no future, all based on FUD that Canonical wants to destroy the flavours.
>>
>> I agree with the too many hoops, though I think its to some extent its just poor wording on Ali's behalf, I don't think he ever meant to make
>> like you have to do all of these 7 (or however many it is on the wiki!) steps to join.
>>
>>