Intent to add a "Packaging" category to discuss.python.org
Just an FYI, I’m going to ask the discuss.python.org <http://discuss.python.org/> admins to add a Packaging category to that discourse instance for the discussion of packaging in Python, basically as a sister discussion location to distutils-sig. I plan to primarily participate and centralize my own personal discussions there, although others are free to continue to discuss wherever they would like (although I think it would be great if folks would all jump over there as well!). I’m not going to request any sub categories at this time, both because I don’t think our traffic is high enough to warrant it, and also because I think that tagging will be a more useful mechanism for us since we can tag things with relevant projects or whatever (or not tag things at all) and topics can have multiple tags.
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 01:27, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
Just an FYI, I’m going to ask the discuss.python.org admins to add a Packaging category to that discourse instance for the discussion of packaging in Python, basically as a sister discussion location to distutils-sig. I plan to primarily participate and centralize my own personal discussions there, although others are free to continue to discuss wherever they would like (although I think it would be great if folks would all jump over there as well!).
I’m not going to request any sub categories at this time, both because I don’t think our traffic is high enough to warrant it, and also because I think that tagging will be a more useful mechanism for us since we can tag things with relevant projects or whatever (or not tag things at all) and topics can have multiple tags.
For now, can I ask that any discussions that need my participation post here. I don't currently have the bandwidth to learn/follow Discourse, so I'm extremely likely to miss things that are posted on there. Specifically, any discussions around packaging standards that need a decision from me, or need my input, should take place on this list. Paul
Hi, On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 11:30 AM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 01:27, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
Just an FYI, I’m going to ask the discuss.python.org admins to add a Packaging category to that discourse instance for the discussion of packaging in Python, basically as a sister discussion location to distutils-sig. I plan to primarily participate and centralize my own personal discussions there, although others are free to continue to discuss wherever they would like (although I think it would be great if folks would all jump over there as well!).
I’m not going to request any sub categories at this time, both because I don’t think our traffic is high enough to warrant it, and also because I think that tagging will be a more useful mechanism for us since we can tag things with relevant projects or whatever (or not tag things at all) and topics can have multiple tags.
For now, can I ask that any discussions that need my participation post here. I don't currently have the bandwidth to learn/follow Discourse, so I'm extremely likely to miss things that are posted on there. Specifically, any discussions around packaging standards that need a decision from me, or need my input, should take place on this list.
You won't miss me much, I'm sure, but I'm also overwhelmed with email, and I really don't want to have another channel to distract me. So, I guess I'm hoping that y'all will bring some summary back to the list for those of us, who are not following Discourse. Cheers, Matthew
On Nov 3, 2018, at 7:27 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 01:27, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
Just an FYI, I’m going to ask the discuss.python.org admins to add a Packaging category to that discourse instance for the discussion of packaging in Python, basically as a sister discussion location to distutils-sig. I plan to primarily participate and centralize my own personal discussions there, although others are free to continue to discuss wherever they would like (although I think it would be great if folks would all jump over there as well!).
I’m not going to request any sub categories at this time, both because I don’t think our traffic is high enough to warrant it, and also because I think that tagging will be a more useful mechanism for us since we can tag things with relevant projects or whatever (or not tag things at all) and topics can have multiple tags.
For now, can I ask that any discussions that need my participation post here. I don't currently have the bandwidth to learn/follow Discourse, so I'm extremely likely to miss things that are posted on there. Specifically, any discussions around packaging standards that need a decision from me, or need my input, should take place on this list.
From a practical matter, as the BDFL-Delegate [1] it would be pretty hard to get a decision somewhere that you’re not participating in. My own personal motivation for client side has been pretty low lately, so I presume that the bulk of what I would be posting there would be related to the server side anyways. Of course I can’t control other people so if other people are posting there for client side stuff, then they’d have to summarize over here for you or something. [1] Although depending on which governance PEP gets selected, we may end up losing our BDFL-Delegate status as some of the proposals don’t grant the ability for the decision making entity to delegate their authority. Although other ones do, though it’s not clear if they grant them on a long standing basis or not, and at least one of them explicitly encodes in the idea of long standing delegations.
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 17:32, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
On Nov 3, 2018, at 7:27 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 01:27, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
Just an FYI, I’m going to ask the discuss.python.org admins to add a Packaging category to that discourse instance for the discussion of packaging in Python, basically as a sister discussion location to distutils-sig. I plan to primarily participate and centralize my own personal discussions there, although others are free to continue to discuss wherever they would like (although I think it would be great if folks would all jump over there as well!).
I’m not going to request any sub categories at this time, both because I don’t think our traffic is high enough to warrant it, and also because I think that tagging will be a more useful mechanism for us since we can tag things with relevant projects or whatever (or not tag things at all) and topics can have multiple tags.
For now, can I ask that any discussions that need my participation post here. I don't currently have the bandwidth to learn/follow Discourse, so I'm extremely likely to miss things that are posted on there. Specifically, any discussions around packaging standards that need a decision from me, or need my input, should take place on this list.
From a practical matter, as the BDFL-Delegate [1] it would be pretty hard to get a decision somewhere that you’re not participating in. My own personal motivation for client side has been pretty low lately, so I presume that the bulk of what I would be posting there would be related to the server side anyways. Of course I can’t control other people so if other people are posting there for client side stuff, then they’d have to summarize over here for you or something.
Indeed :-) I deliberately didn't put it like that as I didn't want to seem like I was making ultimatums (ultimata?) But I am increasingly concerned that the push to move away from the mailing lists to a mixture of web-based pull-style fora (forums? :-)) (github issues, discourse) is fragmenting the discussion base, and making it harder for *anyone* to have a good sense of "what is going on in the community". I don't have an answer (I understand that for you, the mailing list format is as problematic as the web forum format is for me) but I think we should be very cautious of experimenting here, without a better understanding of who will fall by the wayside and what we might lose.
[1] Although depending on which governance PEP gets selected, we may end up losing our BDFL-Delegate status as some of the proposals don’t grant the ability for the decision making entity to delegate their authority. Although other ones do, though it’s not clear if they grant them on a long standing basis or not, and at least one of them explicitly encodes in the idea of long standing delegations.
Which is largely irrelevant, as this is much less about decision makers and much more about building consensus. I don't know how we build any form of consensus if the whole community isn't communicating in a shared discussion :-( Paul
On Nov 3, 2018, at 5:16 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
Which is largely irrelevant, as this is much less about decision makers and much more about building consensus. I don't know how we build any form of consensus if the whole community isn't communicating in a shared discussion :-(
Honestly. I’m not that worried about it. I suspect whoever is making some particular decision whether that is me, you, or some new system that one of the governance PEPs will come up with will have some preferred location for discussion regarding the decisions that decision making authority makes. Beyond that I don’t really think anything has changed. It was already the case that discussion gets spread over multiple venues. As an example, the PEP 440 discussion spread over distutils-sig, a PR to the packaging repo, IRC, Twitter (both public and DMs), and private email threads. I don’t think that PEP 440 was unique in that regards. Generally whenever the “official discussion” is happening will have people summarizing from the other locations where discussion is happening to bolster their own argument or provide context. This might end up that PyPI PEPs have their “official discussion” area to be discourse and the Interoperability PEPs have their “official discussion” continue to be disutils-sig and each of us is going to have a harder time participating in the other kind of PEP. I don’t think that’s a resolvable problem though. It’s also possible that nobody follows me over to the new place and I’m left to discuss there alone and I’ll be forced to continue to follow this mailing list or be shut out of discussions completely (or the reverse that everyone else will like the new forum and won’t want to even use distutils-sig at all and you’ll be forced to adapt or be shut out). I think it’s likely that discussions will happen both places, at least for awhile and then one or the other will wither away. I dunno. I tried to be pretty explicit that I’m not trying to shut down disutils-sig for the people who prefer it, I’m just personally slowly losing my ability to follow mailing list threads at all without burning myself out. So I’m trying to see if I can use a discussion forum that suits me better. If people find that useful great. If not— well at least I tried. I don’t begrudge anyone who wants to continue to use a different forum.
On Nov 2, 2018, at 9:27 PM, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
Just an FYI, I’m going to ask the discuss.python.org <http://discuss.python.org/> admins to add a Packaging category to that discourse instance for the discussion of packaging in Python, basically as a sister discussion location to distutils-sig. I plan to primarily participate and centralize my own personal discussions there, although others are free to continue to discuss wherever they would like (although I think it would be great if folks would all jump over there as well!).
I’m not going to request any sub categories at this time, both because I don’t think our traffic is high enough to warrant it, and also because I think that tagging will be a more useful mechanism for us since we can tag things with relevant projects or whatever (or not tag things at all) and topics can have multiple tags.
This has been created, and lives at https://discuss.python.org/c/packaging <https://discuss.python.org/c/packaging> For anyone who wants to get emails in something like a mailing list like style, logging into discourse (you can use Github even), going to that page and in the top right corner, and selecting “Watching” will give you something resembling a mailing list like behavior where you’ll get an email for every post in every topic (unless you go into a particular topic and unwatch that specific topic), and you’ll be able to reply via email and such. For folks who want to track their read/unread and primarily interact with discourse via the web, either selecting notification levels per topic or going to that same circle in the top right hand corner of the packaging category and selecting “tracking” will automatically track read/unread status for every topic in the packaging category (it won’t send you emails unless someone @mentions you though). There is also the option to “watch first post” which will send you an email for the first post of each new topic, but won’t automatically send you any further email or track the topic unless you explicitly set a topic’s subscription level to something else.
participants (3)
-
Donald Stufft -
Matthew Brett -
Paul Moore