[dojo-contributors] Google Groups management
toonetown at dojotoolkit.org
Tue May 26 09:29:02 EDT 2009
I'm +1 for *a* solution. At this point, I'm +1 for anything besides
continuing the discussion and spending time and resources going back
and forth while the current system is broken. And if it's decided
that the current system is not broken, then I'm +1 for just leaving it
This is not intended to start a new round of flaming, or anything like
that. I just think that plenty of time has been spent by all - me
included - and that if we were to just pick a solution, whether or not
it gives everyone "warm fuzzies", it would at least be more helpful to
the community than spending months on end discussing solutions that
may or may not work. I think that the work that Dustin has done on
the new forums is a great step in the right direction - and google
groups would be equally workable. I think a full-scale support system
is a bit beyond what we would currently be able to support. While
beneficial, I just don't feel we currently have the manpower or
direction to be able to pull something like that off at this point in
time. Perhaps after a while we may be able to.
On May 26, 2009, at 4:35 AM, Nikolai Onken wrote:
>> * making sure all questions get answered
>> * making sure highly useful or correct answers filter to the top for
>> future use
>> * email/forum/[insert other system] unification so all messages get
>> routed and received in the user's choice of mechanisms
>> * mechanism mark a question as answered
>> * mechanism to easily assign questions to the subject experts for
> I think all the points you mention are great and describe a support
> system which could solve a lot of our issues.
> I have a few points we should ask ourselves though:
> - Do we have the resources to do the job of setting up and
> maintaining such a system and if, what timelines are we talking about?
> Is this not just another burdon on our shoulders?
> - Are we deciding on a potentially "unknown" system which might reveal
> issues in the long run and is the system simple enough to not be
> dependent on someones commitment and fundamental knowledge?
> As a counterpoint - though google groups is not an as powerful
> solution as for example Clearspace, it _just_ works and we could bend
> it to our needs at least to some extend (tags, filters, yahoo pipes,
> datastores, DTL).
> - Are we trying to solve too much? Is it really our job to give such
> a high level of support (I think ideally it is :) but still we should
> ask that question). Can we ask such a high commitment from the people
> who help?
> - Will this actually eliminate the need for a simple thread based
> solution or is that included?
> Other random thoughts I have:
> - How about using google groups while having a FAQ style system (with
> answer ranking, etc.) on DojoCampus - something like http://stackoverflow.com/
> I don't necessarily see those two types of support be in conflict
> with each other.
> This would allow us to move forward on the topic while being able to
> improve support by adding extra features.
> this is what we do every day and what we do best and this is how we
> can "impress" people the most.
> We already have tons of ways we can use/manipulate data to our needs
> (dojo.data, DTL, etc.), let's use those.
> At this point I tend to favour a solution which lets us be lean,
> flexible, fast and reliable - and which lets us focus on what we need
> to do. To me google groups is giving a feeling of least magic and
> covers most ground on the issues I am seeing.
> Currently we are missing that flexibility, that leaniness and that
> potential of reacting fast to the needs of the community - until we
> haven't covered that base (and we still have lots of work to do) I am
> hesitant towards more complex solutions.
> ...oh, in regards to code examples - Imho we should have our own
> pastebin (independent of what solution we will be going for), make
> sure it highlights well and off we go.
>> My guess is that if we define clearly what we need and expect, we can
>> get a few people moving in the right direction to create something
>> actually solves our needs. Without a clear sense of purpose and
>> direction, we just keep discussing it and then time passes. Let's
>> a multi-stage spec. for what we need, and see who's interested in
>> it happen, and do it.
>> I also think the result should be a great, high-traffic real-world
>> application of how to make great use of Dojo + something. I know
>> resources are limited, but I think a solid roadmap will make it much
>> easier for anyone that wants to help get involved to get involved.
>> Bill Keese wrote:
>>> Eugene Lazutkin wrote:
>>>> I am the guy who routinely moves questions from one forum to
>>>> another ---
>>>> remember "[editor: moving to the appropriate forum]"? So I have a
>>>> mini-statistics on this topic.
>>> BTW, thanks for doing that and also for the email.
>>>> #1 was mostly due to the fact that users associate Dojo with
>>>> else: "Problem with a dialog, a grid or a chart? Sounds like it
>>>> is a
>>>> Dojo problem => use the Dojo forum.
>>> Yeah, too bad we have unfortunate naming like that.
>>>> [with mailing lists] it would be impossible to
>>>> move posts. Another potential problem specific to mailing lists:
>>>> cross-posting, which can be a problem when we have several of them.
>>> Good point.
>>>> The big question is: do we really need to segment the user support
>>>> django-developers averages 300-500 messages a month,
>>>> django-users --- ~2500 a month => almost 100 per day. Nobody
>>>> yet that it is difficult to fish out relevant messages. Hmm. Food
>>> Sounds like the leaning is to just have a single support group,
>>> especially with nonken's suggestion about tagging?
>>>> Our forum demonstrated another huge problem: it was next to
>>>> for users to post code snippets correctly.
>>> I agree... wish I had a good solution; I don't see a way to do it in
>>> google groups either. There's a file-upload capability but the
>>> aren't tied to particular posts.
>>> We can use the code-snippet website you mentioned but it seems
>>> like a
>>> poor solution. I guess that's one advantage of phpBB (you can
>>> the code with [pre] and [/pre] tags, right?).
>>> dojo-contributors mailing list
>>> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> dojo-contributors mailing list
>> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2433 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20090526/bdbc7fe6/attachment.p7s
More information about the dojo-contributors