On 05/28/2012 03:41 PM, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote: > On 05/28/2012 04:55 PM, Digimer wrote: >> On 05/28/2012 02:42 AM, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote: >>> On 05/28/2012 12:02 AM, Digimer wrote: >>>> I'm not sure if this has come up before, but I thought it might be worth >>>> discussing. >>>> >>>> With the cluster stacks merging, it strikes me that having two separate >>>> channels for effectively the same topic splits up folks. I know that >>>> #linux-ha technically still supports Heartbeat, but other than that, I >>>> see little difference between the two channels. >>>> >>>> I suppose a similar argument could me made for the myriad of mailing >>>> lists, too. I don't know if any of the lists really have significant >>>> enough load to cause a problem if the lists were merged. Could >>>> Linux-Cluster, Corosync and Pacemaker be merged? >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> Digimer, hoping a hornets nest wasn't just opened. :) >>>> >>> >>> So we already have the ha-wg and ha-wg-techincal mailing lists around on >>> the linux fundation servers that should serve as coordination between >>> projects (tho it appears we rarely use them). >>> >>> We could use an IRC equivalent on freenode.. #ha-wg ? the channel is >>> free at moment. >>> >>> I don't see single projects mailing lists or IRC channels disappearing >>> any time soon and it doesn't make sense to kill them all either. >>> Some lists will disappear in time as the projects will slowly become >>> obsoleted. The issue here is that we can't really force it. It has to be >>> a natural process. Look at cman for example. True we obsoleted it in the >>> new world, but effectively cman will not die till RHEL6 support ends in >>> several years from now. >>> >>> Fabio >> >> My worry about a new list would be that it'd be just like a standard > > we already have those lists in place. we just don't use them a lot. > > ; >> >> http://xkcd.com/927/ >> >> If there was to be a merger, I would think that choosing an existing one >> would be best to help avoid this. "Linux-cluster" is pretty generic and >> might fit. > > I generally don't like to go into "politics" but that would be the first > point of friction. linuc-cluster, while i agree it sounds neutral, it is > associated with RHCS and other people are more religious about naming > that others. > >> >> I understand that devs working on project like having a dedicated list >> for their project of interest. For this reason, I decided not to press >> this any more. > > The idea is not bad, don't get me wrong, I am not turning it down. Let's > find a neutral namespace (like ha-wg) and start directing all users of > the new stack there. > > Per project mailing list needs to exist for legacy and they will slowly > fade away naturally. Some project will keep them alive for patch posting > others will do what they want. > >> >> My focus was from a user's perspective... A common place to send users >> who are looking for help with any part of open-source clustering where >> potential helpers can be found. Given the interconnected nature of the >> cluster components, it's hard for users to know which component is >> troubling them at first. >> > > Yup.. so far, the major players have always been crosslooking at > different mailing lists, so the problem is not that bad as it sounds, > but i still agree (as it was discussed before IIRC) a common "umbrella" > would help the final users. > > Fabio Well then, I will un-abandon my position to not proceed. I understand the name 'ha-wg', but I think it's not enough related to clustering for people to easily connect it. I like that it focuses on HA, rather than "clustering" which is an umbrella for both HA and HPC. I like the word "cluster", as it's one of the primary terms users would use to search, I would think. If we must create a new, general purpose name (though I still argue for "linux-cluster", politics aside), then we should take the opportunity to choose a name that is user-friendly, easy to connect to open source cluster. This should also be encouraged to be a user-focused list, to help keep the snr low for devs using their per-project lists, I would suggest. How would something like: * Open Clustering * Open HA Cluster * Other? -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.com -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
