On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Tobias Frilling wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On 09/27/2012 12:43 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

...

And we are back...

Sir, you've got some yarbles. IMHO the cause of all these flaming is that arch-general is too, well, general. What about if we would split this list up into a list for technical questions (e.g. arch-support) and a more philosophical, rambling one (e.g. arch-discussion), so that everyone could choose his/her own poison?

There already is a place for such discussion: http://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux

The 27/09/12, Tobias Frilling wrote:

IMHO the cause of all these flaming is that arch-general is too, well, general.

The problem is not that arch-general is the wrong place for the latter threads. Users are correct to think such discussion should happen here. The problem is that maintainers, developers and advanced users want quality and constructive discussions. But this kind of contribution should happen on the archlinux-dev mailing list which is currently not possible because it's _closed_. The problem is that the dev list should be *open* to subscriptions. Trolling naturally does not happen in such list ― or die very fast ― because of the direct relationship of the discussions with the code and the maintenance jobs. Instead of fragmenting more the mailing lists with the hope of putting poor contributions out of place for advanced users, let enter the technical oriented users into the dev mailing list. Also, this would not let maintainers break from the constructive users with massive unsubscriptions from here. BTW, I find it's a shame that advanced users with technical and valid messages have to *fork* a thread from the dev list to the general list (or post a new request to the general list) with the *hope* that a maintainer/developer catch the reply in the other public mailing list. And no, I don't find requesting in private is a solution, either. The problem is not at the general mailing list but at the dev mailing list side. -- Nicolas Sebrecht

The 27/09/12, Karol Blazewicz wrote:

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:

...

The 27/09/12, Tobias Frilling wrote:

The problem is not at the general mailing list but at the dev mailing list side.

archlinux-dev is for contributors and as long somebody is just a user he should have read-only access.

You pretend that giving access because of the status is better. I claim it's wrong and it's more benefic for everybody to split mailing lists in terms of expected _topics_.

Unless we have a way (and a will) of banning people from that list, there is nothing we can do to prevent flames there, if we open it up.

I understand you might be afraid. This just won't happen because members of the dev mailing list are talking about code and maintenance jobs in concrete terms. Look at the Gentoo dev mailing list. It's fully open. The community is _way_ wider than Arch's one and things are going right. There won't be flames unless you clearly concede that some topics are _exposed_ to flames. If so, this is because topics discussed in the dev mailing list are not as technical as they are supposed to and some of the ones who make the decisions don't always rely on technical facts.

The discussion on archlinux-dev is often based on RFCs made by some dev and you can comment on it on arch-general just fine.

So, you admit that constructive topics are going to be splitted between mailing lists only because of the policy relying on status. Then you should also admit: * each time a thread is broken over mailing lists, the "out-going" threads lose touch with contributors not subscribed to the users mailing list; * not official Arch members have more pain to reach official contributors directly in a public way (members of the dev mailing list are not supposed to be subscribed to the users mailing list and mailing lists are not nested); * interesting contributions are lost because the policy is a discouraging frein to people who'd like to involve themselve a bit more into the maintenance job; * people are not much motivated to contribute from time to time because of the status wall.

Can you give some examples of discussions you would see moving to archlinux-dev?

Sure. Subject: [arch-general] Modifying archiso From: Robbie Smith Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 19:47:11 +1000 To: arch-general@archlinux.org Message-ID: <5058431F.5090707@gmail.com> Subject: [arch-general] Open Build Service adds support for Arch Linux From: André Prata Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:48:36 +0100 To: arch-general@archlinux.org Subject: [arch-general] swt - why depends bump to java-runtime>=7? From: "David C. Rankin" Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:06:46 -0500 To: Archlinux Message-ID: <504E5666.3000902@suddenlinkmail.com> Subject: [arch-general] archiso - more install guides From: vadim kochan Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2012 22:33:39 +0300 To: arch-general@archlinux.org Subject: [arch-general] Requesting ownership of the bugs for AIF in the bugtracker From: Jeremiah Dodds Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 05:21:24 -0400 To: Arch General List Message-ID: <87ehmjxy0b.fsf@friendface.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Subject: [arch-dev-public] Re: [RFC] another base cleanup From: Nicolas Sebrecht Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:27:58 +0200 To: Public mailing list for Arch Linux development Message-ID: <20120607072758.GB2427@nicolas-desktop> These are only samples. I can't take the samples of topic not even written Here is a good article: http://blog.cyberborean.org/2006/03/03/open-source-best-practices-part-i-com... Take this excerpt " Don’t let the people feel they do something personally for you – this is ultimately not the case since you’ve published your code. Let them feel this is their project as well as it is yours — and this is really so. Don’t turn your authority as an initial developer and project maintainer into dictation. Remember Tao: “If you want to lead other people, you must put their interest ahead of your own”. " and apply the argument for the mailing lists instead of the code only. My point is that the dev mailing list should be the *main* discussion forum of the community. The users mailing list should not be turned into a "This is the place where people without authority are welcome to exchange with other non-authority people" . Oh, and for the arch-general mailing list we should even add "Even if you can't talk directly with authoritative members and have contructive discussions with them you MUST follow strict policy and technical power users discussions. If not the authoritative members might and WILL close your mailing list for some time for punishment" . -- Nicolas Sebrecht

The 28/09/12, Allan McRae wrote:

If all that crap went to arch-dev-public, I would have to unsubscribe there too.

What you're calling crap are all technical content that could gain with direct emulation with official maintainers. BTW, what a wonderfull attitude from you to non official people. Highly contructive and motivating. Thanks. -- Nicolas Sebrecht

[2012-09-28 11:38:13 +0200] Nicolas Sebrecht:

What you're calling crap are all technical content that could gain with direct emulation with official maintainers.

We have recently seen on this very mailing list that for every person posting considerate opinions, there are dozens who just pollute threads with fear, uncertainty, doubt, and just sheer incompetence. We simply cannot allow that to spread to arch-dev-public, even if we all agree it is too bad that some people with considerate opinions are not allowed to post there just because they aren't devs. -- Gaetan

On Sep 28, 2012 12:01 PM, "Nicolas Sebrecht" wrote:

The 28/09/12, Gaetan Bisson wrote:

...

We have recently seen on this very mailing list that for every person posting considerate opinions, there are dozens who just pollute threads with fear, uncertainty, doubt, and just sheer incompetence.

I'm very confident that an open dev mailing list with topic-oriented policy would just work. I'm so confident because this is how the Gentoo dev mailing list works and it works well.

An option could be to enable moderation on dev-public, still defaulting to rejecting everything, but allow through high-quality contributions from the outside. I agree that we should create a venue for would-be contributors to engage with us, but i also agree that we don't want to end up with non constructive content in dev-public, and we don't want to waste time on justifying rejecting/banning things (it should stay high-quality and low volume as we expect all devs and all users of testing to read it thoroughly). I don't know the best solution, just throwing out an idea. Tom

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:

On Sep 28, 2012 12:01 PM, "Nicolas Sebrecht" wrote:

...

The 28/09/12, Gaetan Bisson wrote:

...

We have recently seen on this very mailing list that for every person posting considerate opinions, there are dozens who just pollute threads with fear, uncertainty, doubt, and just sheer incompetence.

I'm very confident that an open dev mailing list with topic-oriented policy would just work. I'm so confident because this is how the Gentoo dev mailing list works and it works well.

An option could be to enable moderation on dev-public, still defaulting to rejecting everything, but allow through high-quality contributions from the outside.

I agree that we should create a venue for would-be contributors to engage with us, but i also agree that we don't want to end up with non constructive content in dev-public, and we don't want to waste time on justifying rejecting/banning things (it should stay high-quality and low volume as we expect all devs and all users of testing to read it thoroughly).

I don't know the best solution, just throwing out an idea.

Tom

It "might" work - but some lucky person would have to go through the rejected stuff and filter out the worthwhile posts to allow through - if I was a dev/moderator I might not want to undertake that task! At least at the moment the read only dev list is not polluted with "c**p" as Allan might say! I am sure there must be a significant number of people who are simply not interested in seeing the "flame wars"/"troll posts" at all - so not having them in the list to start with for me at least is the better option - i.e. the status quo. On the other hand is it possible to "apply" for write permission to the dev list for non-devs? Though I would not like to be the person making those decisions either! If anyone has been subscribed to the Fedora General list in the past year or so, then you will have seen equally long running and equally non-productive troll threads there - (one reason I unsubscribed from that list some time ago). I do like clean clear concise and logical technical discussion which I expect is the view of many others too! -- mike c

[2012-09-28 12:01:01 +0200] Nicolas Sebrecht:

The 28/09/12, Gaetan Bisson wrote:

...

We have recently seen on this very mailing list that for every person posting considerate opinions, there are dozens who just pollute threads with fear, uncertainty, doubt, and just sheer incompetence.

I'm very confident that an open dev mailing list with topic-oriented policy would just work. I'm so confident because this is how the Gentoo dev mailing list works and it works well.

So, essentially, you have no arguments except that "it should just work like it does for Gentoo"; yet you've posted in this thread five times only to repeat the above. But, of course, if our topic of discussion were to be technical, your stubbornness (and the resulting noise) would magically go away, right? -- Gaetan

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 11:53 AM, <1007380@gmail.com> wrote: <snip>

...sometimes I want to contact the devs to bring something up or ask a question on it.

There's a bug tracker where you can directly contact maintainers, for bugs/feature requests. For 'questions' I'd think that's not really the responsibility of the maintainers/devs/TUs. Example:- 1. Program A crashes when I do X 2. Why is this configure flag not enabled for library B? 3. The documentation-supplied config for application C doesn't run. 4. How do I set up a server using D? 5. Why was this decision made for application/library E? 1, 2, and 3 are suitable for the bug tracker (maybe more suitable for upstream bug tracker though, in some cases). 4 should not be directed at devs or TUs, ever. 5, depending on content, is a feature request or a topic going nowhere (hence TGN in the forums). I do not support the opening of arch-dev-public (its supposed to be an announcement list) nor the creation of any other channel for devs to be contacted. Its the community's responsibility to keep arch-general clean enough that devs/TUs don't quit it. arch-discussion etc. would not help simply because in general the endless topics ARE initially technical, and most of us have a fuzzy line between technical topics and our personal opinions on them anyway.

Op 30 sep. 2012 06:37 schreef "Nicholas MIller" het volgende:

On Sep 29, 2012 10:26 PM, "Oon-Ee Ng" wrote:

...

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 11:53 AM, <1007380@gmail.com> wrote: <snip>

...

...sometimes I want to contact the devs to bring something up or ask a question on it.

There's a bug tracker where you can directly contact maintainers, for bugs/feature requests. For 'questions' I'd think that's not really the responsibility of the maintainers/devs/TUs.

Example:- 1. Program A crashes when I do X 2. Why is this configure flag not enabled for library B? 3. The documentation-supplied config for application C doesn't run. 4. How do I set up a server using D? 5. Why was this decision made for application/library E?

1, 2, and 3 are suitable for the bug tracker (maybe more suitable for upstream bug tracker though, in some cases). 4 should not be directed at devs or TUs, ever. 5, depending on content, is a feature request or a topic going nowhere (hence TGN in the forums).

I do not support the opening of arch-dev-public (its supposed to be an announcement list) nor the creation of any other channel for devs to be contacted. Its the community's responsibility to keep arch-general clean enough that devs/TUs don't quit it. arch-discussion etc. would not help simply because in general the endless topics ARE initially technical, and most of us have a fuzzy line between technical topics and our personal opinions on them anyway.

When i first say the suggestion of another list (discussion)i thought it might be a good idea however

The line between technical and opinion usually seem the same at the start

+1 from me. There are sometimes quite interesting details mentioned in the OT threads. A -discuss list would be a good place for those, without cluttering -general. (yes, i'm being an optimist here ;-). Opening dev-public would take some serious manpower. I see a little advantage but quite an investment (manpower, not financial). Better leave it as-is. Mvg, Guus

Instead of fragmenting more the mailing lists with the hope of putting poor contributions out of place for advanced users, let enter the technical oriented users into the dev mailing list. I don't think that opening arch-dev-public for everybody would solve our

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/27/2012 04:35 PM, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: problems, it would just relocate the noise into this list. The devs and TUs really need a quiet list of their own with a good signal/noise ratio. (There is no arch-dev-secret, is there?) So what if there was a arch-technical list instead of a arch-support, where all the help request could land and also *purely* technical contributions from advanced users? dev-public could stay as-is with reports and other official stuff, technical would be the list for support and contribution and discussion for rambling and flaming :-) The thing is, some users really want this kind of heated debate, and the only alternative we currently have is banning, which some consider censorship, or shutting the list down for a day (still, awesome!). With the new split there would be the alternative "guys, stay on topic or take is to -discussion". -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQZGohAAoJENVg3RpC7ZC8qSsQAMyu4+T8xWmXczmB+PehnaRZ g1aVUIEKxyXXi7MAg/nNU+tWqCo+RpVavFyoRJWpv9+NWUlRjNKB/ReTIjvTebBU rClb8TnWTaKMejG9mMtGZd1zoqJBomTmNYdTEpVurNxEfp79wXOnNPIp0QrPvFZW K/ZTEbtSt/iChy3LRqTuJkAp4nc4yv4MvwQ0fyE2h952Dwg0B2ZOKc5TdYmsjIE3 U2Hb+0XxFwLZlLcKCaob4s0y9dCEMRQ6Yb07hEOlcuxfoi3D0zeaPtv1+yerasqv 2HeaD17iXSGJFhO88bp6ycv+MrNXgM3KD81O7hnjNjfBYXg6UtoCb05JHPcKPaR1 1TW/z5/8MzU45T2C0UQWpNhimDGrb6uLyFAITLYFjLlnkGnsHxOxdgRivRfLEjS6 dOKOvY0K8okI5R0PRcCQjS87LmFm9fs/U4SfJiQZS9Z4m4gs/F7wbTsV2lJ+aecx xRKjOO1ER8Bldz0NKgiSuOI/7H4c4AVw8hkhP2Oi/NcwH5zLiQxZCdbGG9FM9Xr+ yIVhxJYTPP3UtaZrvCWhAsg6yvDa3agHy9yJWJWCw7HnLt6VI+SO3XeH0hGb/1p5 BlB+6HOn1ABtHLZXb1RCi/Pkphd9hikAI/ozbBYiNhb+u2IkQoplDUsFty20CTiU /ggbHX9i3Jxn62nV9/VW =sfRb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:28 PM, mike cloaked wrote:

For those users who use the arch forums via a web interface there seems to be more helpful comments and less trolling than in the general list - just an observation - maybe that is because the forums are split into a number of topic specific separate forums - eg installation, kernel, server/networking newbie etc.

-- mike c

As it was mentioned a couple times on the list, the forums have moderators. If you don't behave, you get banned, threads get closed etc.

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 17:28:02 +0100 mike cloaked wrote:

For those users who use the arch forums via a web interface there

Is there an alternative way to access the forums? mailing list, usenet? -- Joakim

While I would like to support @Tobias idea of splitting the list I also agree with all the following emails. Btw, so much time using Arch and I've never heard about http://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux, thanks for that. I only want to add an observation to what was already said: Tipically all this flame seems to arise at the gates of new'n profound changes and as such it's perfectly understandable that these kind of things happens. We Arch Linux users are a kind of users who: 1. loves to know. While we are glad to solve a specific issue that's graying our hair, we will *not* be satisfied until we understand what the hell was happening and all the inner workings of that - that's a fact. 2. we don't like to let anybody hold our hand (well, I would let Eva Mendes hold mine... ) and as such we tend to be a bit grumpy about those users who come for help without actually _thinking_ about what can be the problem or at least without searching the forums, the wiki and the intertubes. On the other hand we are totally open to those folks that come with a problem explaining what's happenig, what they did and the results (in part because we enjoy solving these puzzles). 3. we are mostly self taught, autodidacts. As such we each develop an almost _unique_ way to interact with our systems and as such are our viewpoints about general GNU/Linux and F/LOSS and everything's else in life: yeah, we are free thinkers. 4. as a result of above we usually tailor our systems to our own personal taste and way to use it. 5. as a result of above we usually have a *strong* opinion about things, specially that things that may/will change the way we use our system - and here is when flames arise. 6. in the end we all love Arch with it's drawbacks -thankfully not many- and all it awesomeness, and deeply we know that while there are some aspects that aren't exactly the way we expect or at least how we would like them to be, the reality is that when we see how other distros works, when we have to deal with other distros because work, support to friends, our LUGs or anything else, we don't like them: while there may be some puntual things that may appeal to us the overall system _don't_! So Arch Linux's the way, what else? (At least this is how I feel regarding the rest of GNU/Linux distros since I first meet Arch a few years ago.) As a result of above I forsee more flaming in the future whenever a critical update or shift (like systemd is) come, that's shitty but's a natural reaction and thus we need to remain patient to passionate arguments and stubborn people - which in no way means to sacrifice our opinions. Regarding the flow of new users it's likely they *must* learn our house rules rather to we accomodate to them. I consider the forums, the wiki, this list and Arch Linux in general as my house in what F/LOSS regards and I don't like to see it vandalized - and wont allow that. A bit of trolling is funny as well too much politeness is insufferable and I can accomodate a low-hit if a say or ask for something stupid -and I will be the first to make laugh of myself for that- but newcomers should to be _clearly_ aware that we don't like nor support bad attitude and that we can hold their hands only to help them start: in this regard I can say Arch Linux is one of the most both friendly and connoisseur communities abroad GNU/Linux-land and I'm most grateful for it for help me start using this great distro when I first switched from *buntu-land. I'm but sure that now the systemd adoption is a fact we will have peaceful times ahead with the usual chit-chat and the new technologie seek-for-aid mails so I vote to give us -this list- some time before commit any change like splitting or anything else. Also I would like to encourage any dev, TU or skillful users that might have unsubscribed in the recent time to subscribe again an help push arch-general to it's greatest potential. Greetings!

Very eloquently put brethren "+1" On Sep 27, 2012 9:33 PM, "Martín Cigorraga" wrote:

While I would like to support @Tobias idea of splitting the list I also agree with all the following emails. Btw, so much time using Arch and I've never heard about http://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux, thanks for that.

I only want to add an observation to what was already said: Tipically all this flame seems to arise at the gates of new'n profound changes and as such it's perfectly understandable that these kind of things happens. We Arch Linux users are a kind of users who: 1. loves to know. While we are glad to solve a specific issue that's graying our hair, we will *not* be satisfied until we understand what the hell was happening and all the inner workings of that - that's a fact. 2. we don't like to let anybody hold our hand (well, I would let Eva Mendes hold mine... ) and as such we tend to be a bit grumpy about those users who come for help without actually _thinking_ about what can be the problem or at least without searching the forums, the wiki and the intertubes. On the other hand we are totally open to those folks that come with a problem explaining what's happenig, what they did and the results (in part because we enjoy solving these puzzles). 3. we are mostly self taught, autodidacts. As such we each develop an almost _unique_ way to interact with our systems and as such are our viewpoints about general GNU/Linux and F/LOSS and everything's else in life: yeah, we are free thinkers. 4. as a result of above we usually tailor our systems to our own personal taste and way to use it. 5. as a result of above we usually have a *strong* opinion about things, specially that things that may/will change the way we use our system - and here is when flames arise. 6. in the end we all love Arch with it's drawbacks -thankfully not many- and all it awesomeness, and deeply we know that while there are some aspects that aren't exactly the way we expect or at least how we would like them to be, the reality is that when we see how other distros works, when we have to deal with other distros because work, support to friends, our LUGs or anything else, we don't like them: while there may be some puntual things that may appeal to us the overall system _don't_! So Arch Linux's the way, what else? (At least this is how I feel regarding the rest of GNU/Linux distros since I first meet Arch a few years ago.)

As a result of above I forsee more flaming in the future whenever a critical update or shift (like systemd is) come, that's shitty but's a natural reaction and thus we need to remain patient to passionate arguments and stubborn people - which in no way means to sacrifice our opinions. Regarding the flow of new users it's likely they *must* learn our house rules rather to we accomodate to them. I consider the forums, the wiki, this list and Arch Linux in general as my house in what F/LOSS regards and I don't like to see it vandalized - and wont allow that. A bit of trolling is funny as well too much politeness is insufferable and I can accomodate a low-hit if a say or ask for something stupid -and I will be the first to make laugh of myself for that- but newcomers should to be _clearly_ aware that we don't like nor support bad attitude and that we can hold their hands only to help them start: in this regard I can say Arch Linux is one of the most both friendly and connoisseur communities abroad GNU/Linux-land and I'm most grateful for it for help me start using this great distro when I first switched from *buntu-land.

I'm but sure that now the systemd adoption is a fact we will have peaceful times ahead with the usual chit-chat and the new technologie seek-for-aid mails so I vote to give us -this list- some time before commit any change like splitting or anything else. Also I would like to encourage any dev, TU or skillful users that might have unsubscribed in the recent time to subscribe again an help push arch-general to it's greatest potential.

Greetings!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/27/2012 09:44 PM, Øyvind Heggstad wrote:

I can only see two things that can really help slow down/stop/revert the spiral:

1) Moderation. Get rid of the serial trollers/flamers 2) Get more devs and "good" people to join and be active.

For your last point: Thats putting the horse behind the cart. Most devs and/or skilled users leave -general just because it has become such a dump. Concerning moderation: See my last mail. Some users will always going head first into heated discussions. The -discussion mailing list could serve as an outlet for this need, rendering the other list more productive via being moderated; The rule wouldn't be "shut up or be banned", which shouldn't really be necessary for rational folks like us, but "shut up or take this to -discussion" with banning as ultima ratio. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQZJw4AAoJENVg3RpC7ZC8o6YQANGIaXG7lURFDQp5ji82bopt nhN6brOcQkBNKeGw2l37f8jTwWwggU5H/PFogOSRGxuN3pYn4Q3xznNFwqA5OmrS GnnqfEX/AUIhN41EOqC3VgrPNomrJg79PB4C37e+k6TbW8T6yBTYBJdtdkksiT+S F/d3rwHeHSYt07EAWFmCoKg18yxW8yGt7dvsnWvm+DLCe9VkfSxHP1zDgMr31ZX5 +33PAG7JZIUp6olJ0Oqp83mJexaJiU0rO7jp8gBKWe02XklAGTxElGqRXtSdaR8O jBEJMIhx2fw84cZP36GYpK1QV3hAInNuWHju9ce4zxI4HJ7vkbGkspz80Kwv76H/ hRo/DjUChyb3seM3f7VNupBKznKx8EhsoUWa+Wem0xMNAJVsYVDWcpEeyGtP5Rl5 5abUxk1/vg2K228TKXc80wc2a0U3HbaoV22sLCDCGzEj//vWpvSY7Q3CEyi8S1+H OCY5KhBZR1f8tkWF0B2bf2J8twy1VRYWLRMLey4/RJitHRXyWKIjD5JciWeNk3SW IU9hPfNjlKm9cE+56e3MvB58Zav5QtdtcL123SqBe1hArHy9Nn7m6VrUcHeF4Orv BFQJMUJU1XUQR/g0z/zODYqSF6Yvmu/gfWSNM6nTOmb4Mrj6qqo1iIjGwEwMOSaT OQOeBbPtGDwlfL/Hmf0L =nJzp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----