Thanks for your replies! @Konstantin Knauf <kna...@apache.org> > Why do you think the quality and speed of answers would improve with dedicated lists? If there is a question on something that you are not an expert in; then you either have to - pull in someone who is more experienced in it (more time on hops, esp. if the pulled in person isn't available) - or learn it and answer yourself (more time on learning and still higher chance of missing something)
@Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> and @Dawid Wysakowicz <dwysakow...@apache.org> > I fear that we are creating potential silos where a team doesn't know > what is going on in the other teams. I think some specialization is unavoidable in a big project like Flink or Linux (which also has separate lists). And user support ML doesn't seem to me the right tool to deal with it. @Dawid Wysakowicz <dwysakow...@apache.org> > Personally I don't find it problematic. I often find the subjects quite > descriptive, they often include tags or mention which API they refer to. Yes, but that only means that the sender would already know the "right" list. @Konstantin Knauf <kna...@apache.org> and @j...@apache.org <j...@apache.org> I agree that there are crosscutting areas; and also a chance of sending a message to the wrong topic. But splitting doesn't change anything here: if a SQL question for example is asked on StateFun ML then we still have the options above (plus an option to redirect user to the other list). Regards, Roman On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:30 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <dwysakow...@apache.org> wrote: > As others I'd also rather be -1 on splitting (even splitting out the > statefun). > > Personally I don't find it problematic. I often find the subjects quite > descriptive, they often include tags or mention which API they refer to. > If they don't I am quite sure having separate sub-lists would not help > in those cases anyway. I agree with the others that splitting the list > would make the cross communication harder and create knowledge silos. > > It would also incur more requirements on users which already often find > ML counter intuitive (See e.g. the discussion about adding a Flink slack) > > Best, > > Dawid > > On 01/03/2021 11:20, Timo Walther wrote: > > I would vote -0 here. > > > > I fear that we are creating potential silos where a team doesn't know > > what is going on in the other teams. > > > > Regards, > > Timo > > > > > > On 01.03.21 10:47, Jark Wu wrote: > >> I also have some concerns about splitting python and sql. > >> Because I have seen some SQL questions users reported but is related to > >> deployment or state backend. > >> > >> Best, > >> Jark > >> > >> On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 17:15, Konstantin Knauf <konstan...@ververica.com > > > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Roman, > >>> > >>> I slightly +1 for a list dedicated to Statefun users, but -1 for > >>> splitting > >>> up the rest. I think there are still a lot of crosscutting concerns > >>> between > >>> Python, DataStream, Table API and SQL where users of another API can > >>> also > >>> help out, too. It also requires users to think about which lists to > >>> subscribe/write to, instead of simply subscribing to one list. > >>> > >>> Why do you think the quality and speed of answers would improve with > >>> dedicated lists? > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> > >>> Konstantin > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 10:09 AM xiao...@ysstech.com > >>> <xiao...@ysstech.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Roman, > >>>> > >>>> This is a very good idea. I will look forward to the official > >>>> setting up > >>>> "sub-lists" as soon as possible and sharing development experience and > >>>> problems with friends in a certain field. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> yue > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> xiao...@ysstech.com > >>>> > >>>> From: Roman Khachatryan > >>>> Date: 2021-03-01 16:48 > >>>> To: dev > >>>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Splitting User support mailing list > >>>> Hi everyone, > >>>> > >>>> I'd like to propose to extract several "sub-lists" from our user > >>>> mailing > >>>> list (u...@flink.apache.org). > >>>> > >>>> For example, > >>>> - user-sql@flink.a.o (Python) > >>>> - user-statefun@f.a.o (StateFun) > >>>> - user-py@f.a.o. (SQL/TableAPI) > >>>> And u...@flink.apache.org will remain the main or "default" list. > >>>> > >>>> That would improve the quality and speed of the answers and allow > >>>> developers to concentrate on the relevant topics. > >>>> > >>>> At the downside, this would lessen the exposure to the various Flink > >>> areas > >>>> for lists maintainers. > >>>> > >>>> What do you think? > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Roman > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Konstantin Knauf | Head of Product > >>> > >>> +49 160 91394525 > >>> > >>> > >>> Follow us @VervericaData Ververica <https://www.ververica.com/> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Join Flink Forward <https://flink-forward.org/> - The Apache Flink > >>> Conference > >>> > >>> Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Ververica GmbH | Invalidenstrasse 115, 10115 Berlin, Germany > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Ververica GmbH > >>> Registered at Amtsgericht Charlottenburg: HRB 158244 B > >>> Managing Directors: Yip Park Tung Jason, Jinwei (Kevin) Zhang, Karl > >>> Anton > >>> Wehner > >>> > >> > > > >
