-1 I would also be in favour of not adding a Slack channel. I see that it can be useful for people because it's a little more direct but I think that having Slack open and also receiving questions and contacts from people there adds more burden on developers that we shouldn't add. Plus, I think having a searchable mail archive is really nice and moving some discussion to slack breaks that.
> On 3. Apr 2018, at 08:17, Suneel Marthi <smar...@apache.org> wrote: > > *As one of the admins for ASF slack*, let me clarify a few things: > > 1. ASF slack is open to everyone regardless of apache,org or not - u need > to make a request on dev@ to be added to ASF slack if you don't have an > apache.org > > 2. There is an archive bot in place on ASF slack for archiving older > messages and keeping out to the free tier 10000 messages > > 3. I am with Till Rohrman, Chesnay and others here who have already > expressed their -1 and am strong -1 too regarding moving Flink convos to a > slack channel - *this project has been very exemplary in being transparent > and community-driven from Day 1 as an Apache podling* - I really don't see > a reason for Flink to be moving to slack. > > My -1 again to slack move. > > > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> bq. A bot could archive the messages to a web site, or forward to the email >> list >> >> I think some formatting / condensing may be needed if communication on >> Slack is forwarded to mailing list - since the sentences on Slack may not >> be as polished as on the emails. >> There is also the mapping between a person's identity on Slack versus on >> email. >> >> FYI >> >> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 7:56 AM, TechnoMage <mla...@technomage.com> wrote: >> >>> We use Slack in many contexts, company, community, etc. It has many >>> advantages over email. For one being a separate channel from general >> email >>> it stands out when there are new messages. Notifications can be >> configured >>> separately for each channel, and can arrive on multiple mobile devices >> with >>> synchronization between them. A bot could archive the messages to a web >>> site, or forward to the email list. It also allows upload of code >> snippets >>> with formatting and voice/screen sharing where appropriate. I would love >>> to see it a supported platform. >>> >>> Michael >>> >>>> On Apr 3, 2018, at 7:52 AM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> The invite link is self service. Everyone can signup. >>>> >>>> As for the searchable record, it may be possible to archive what's >> posted >>>> on the slack channel by subscribing the mailing list. >>>> >>>> I think a communication platform like Slack or IRC complements email, >> the >>>> type of messages there would typically be different from email threads. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Thomas >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 7:37 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> It is the lack of searchable public record (of Slack) that we should >> be >>>>> concerned with. >>>>> >>>>> Also, requiring invitation would be bottleneck for the growth of >>>>> participants. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:11 AM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm a bit torn here. On the one hand I think Slack would be nice >>> because >>>>> it >>>>>> allows a more direct interaction. Similar to the IRC channel we once >>> had. >>>>>> >>>>>> On the other hand, I fear that some information/discussions might get >>>>> lost >>>>>> in the depths of Slack and at least after the 10000 message limit has >>>>> been >>>>>> reached. Posting these things on the ML allows to persist the >>> information >>>>>> in the ML archives. Moreover, it would discourage to some extent the >>>>> usage >>>>>> of the ML in general which is not in the sense of the ASF. >>>>>> >>>>>> The problem that only ASF committers have access to the ASF slack >>> channel >>>>>> can be solved by an explicit invite for everyone [1]. >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://s.apache.org/slack-invite >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Till >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 3:09 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for the background information. >>>>>>> I withdraw previous +1 >>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Chesnay Schepler < >>>>>>> ches...@apache.org> Date: 4/3/18 4:50 AM (GMT-08:00) To: >>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org Subject: Re: Using Slack for online >> discussions >>>>>>> -1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. According to INFRA-14292 >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14292> the ASF >> Slack >>>>>>> isn't run by the ASF. This alone puts this service into rather >>>>>>> questionable territory as it /looks/ like an official ASF >> service. >>>>>>> If anyone can provide information to the contrary, please do so. >>>>>>> 2. We already discuss things on the mailing lists, JIRA and GitHub. >>>>> All >>>>>>> of these are available to the public, whereas the slack channel >>>>>>> requires an @apache mail address, i.e. you have to be a >> committer. >>>>>>> This minimizes the target audience rather significantly. I would >>>>>>> much rather prefer something that is also available to >>>>> contributors. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 30.03.2018 10:17, Ted Yu wrote: >>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>> j...@nanthrax.net> Date: 3/30/18 12:43 AM (GMT-08:00) To: >>>>>>> dev@flink.apache.org Subject: Re: Using Slack for online >> discussions >>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 03/29/2018 07:22 PM, Thomas Weise wrote: >>>>>>>>> How does the community think about using ASF Slack for online >>>>>>> discussions? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The Beam project started to use it recently and it seems to work >>>>> quite >>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>> [1] [2]. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ >> 1bee60193823a8411dcfad7a6de695 >>>>>>> ac1d779ae5d14f7b954ffa5961@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ >> b82871dc16b63a4e74cd6373405361 >>>>>>> dfbd75810073f98542ba82ed41@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Thomas >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>
