> > It rather seems to me that tools targeted to synchronous > communication are quite bad for asynchronous usage. >
I quite disagree, I use slack for async communication a lot. Including underrepresented in IT Outreachy (https://www.outreachy.org/) interns that I am mentoring - from India, Peru and Nigeria that I am interacting with them over the last 3 months of their internship Most of that is asynchronous because I live in Poland which is about 12 hours apart from both India and Peru. And we have different holidays schedules. Heck - another mentor for the project is in Israel where Sunday is a working day and Friday is not. VAST majority of our communication is done by Slack. Could you please explain what are your experiences that are somehow bad? What are the success/failure stories you can share ? Please. some examples. I can provide a dosen of those that led to successes and failures and learning from those. But to be perfectly clear the Github Discussions example I've shown is 100% asynchronous - apparently you missed that point. > Assuming that I'm only subscribed to some project's "dev@" ML, how > can I interact with either of those solutions? > * Point 1 - I have not seen "no need to subscribe to interact" as a requirement. I probably missed it. But I am sure you can point me in the right direction. * Point 2. But even if I missed it - for Github Discussions it is enough to reply to the email you get - with your personal email. You must have missed the point as well. It's full interaction, you "reply-to" and your entry is part of the discussion. Does it qualify as interaction ? Or do we need more ? What else do we need? > I still fail to understand the reason for looking for alternatives toth > MLs for managing ASF projects... > Maybe the many thousands of people who do not know how to subscribe - from China - as mentioned before, in the thread. I am not sure if that's enough of an argument for you. Lots of love. J.
