The idea is really to "square" GH Discussion only to roadmap/design proposals.
For "user support", more than Slack, I would love to see u...@iceberg.apache.org. So I would distinguish: - the design/spec proposals where we could use GH Discussions. If people use GH Discussion for support questions, then we can move to GH Issue or direct to the mailing list/slack. - the user "support" should be on user mailing list and/or Slack You have a valid point: GH Discussions could be hard to manage because most users will use it as a "support forum". My point is really: - we need a central space for design/spec proposals - it has to be on Iceberg community and visible for all Regards JB On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 5:30 PM Brian Olsen <bitsondata...@gmail.com> wrote: > > GitHub Discussions could be a solution that we should consider. We used it on > the Trino side but still have mixed results with it. On one hand, there's a > lot of overlap between creating Issues and Discussions. In fact, GitHub > allows you to migrate Issues that only involve discussing a topic, or > something that can't immediately be tied to any upcoming work to be a > discussion. This keeps the Issue backlog focused on actionable requests. > > That said, Discussions can become difficult to maintain if no person or body > of people drives it. Of course, the community will drive it to some degree, > especially when it's new and shiny, but GitHub Discussions, much like Slack, > becomes a support channel that encourages the messy human interactions that > help us arrive at a solution. So the question is do we want to open > Discussions knowing that it may become a second support channel compared to > Slack? Would we want to use Discussions in place of Slack so that there's > still a single triage channel? > > I personally lean towards keeping a single real-time "support-like" channel > in the community, otherwise, you will fragment the attention of the > community. Most of what we would need to support the centralization of > proposals can be accomplished with Issues. Slack still seems to be the > dominant interactive system of choice and where we are now so I wouldn't > suggest moving that. I do think this is worth a discussion at the next sync > so I'll add it. > > In full transparency, Tabular is building an Iceberg-focused Discourse forum > (not to be confused with Discord) instance to solve the problem of > centralizing discussions in the community to wiki-style answers we can link > to and having dedicated content curators to those solutions. Think of it as > an Iceberg-specific Stack Overflow with lightened rules to allow more open > discussion. Adding GitHub discussions wouldn't collide with our goals as it > would become another signal that we could use to inform the answers on our > forum. It still comes back to the value given the cost for the community to > manage it. > > I know I have a lot of thoughts around this and its because I've been down > this road before, but perhaps there's a nuance I'm not seeing yet. > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 7:15 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: >> >> Just to be clear: we can GH Discussions subjects template via >> .asf.yaml but we have to open a ticket to INFRA to enable it. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 1:56 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Brian >> > >> > I like the idea of GitHub. Why not enabling (in .asf.yml) GitHub >> > discussions ? A GitHub Discussion could be a good place to share the >> > doc and exchange both in the doc and in the discussion comments. >> > >> > Regards >> > JB >> > >> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 1:13 PM Brian Olsen <bitsondata...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hey JB, >> > > >> > > I totally agree we need a place to centralize this but I'm nit a huge >> > > fan of all the lists we currently have going on the site. SSGs are just >> > > not an accessible method of storing lists. ( roadmap, blogs, videos, >> > > etc..). >> > > >> > > The roadmap is barely touched for this reason. I want to propose we move >> > > roadmap to GitHub projects. >> > > >> > > Likewise, I feel like somewhere on GitHub might be a better location for >> > > this type of thing. >> > > >> > > Maybe posting these in GitHub issues and adding a proposal label? >> > > >> > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 9:28 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >> > > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Hi Jan >> > >> >> > >> Thanks for the reminder. I will take a look. >> > >> >> > >> As proposed by Renjie a few days ago, it would be great to >> > >> gather/store all document proposals in a central place. >> > >> >> > >> If there are no objections, I will prepare a PR for the website about >> > >> that (with a space listing/linking all proposals). >> > >> >> > >> Regards >> > >> JB >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 9:22 AM Jan Kaul <jank...@mailbox.org.invalid> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > >> > >> > I've created an issue to propose a design for a Materialized View >> > >> > Spec a while ago. After further discussion we reached a first draft >> > >> > for the spec. It would be great if you could have another look at the >> > >> > design and share your feedback. >> > >> > >> > >> > Here is the google doc: >> > >> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UnhldHhe3Grz8JBngwXPA6ZZord1xMedY5ukEhZYF-A/edit?usp=sharing >> > >> > >> > >> > Thanks in advance, >> > >> > >> > >> > Jan
