On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 19:01 Tomas Mraz <tomas@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 2023-03-20 at 18:56 +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 18:50 Tomas Mraz <tomas@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder if some of the concerns were alleviated if we started
> > using
> > the GitHub Discussions feature for the user-type questions and
> > general
> > discussions of OpenSSL. You can subscribe and watch only
> > Discussions on
> > a GH project - i.e., have notifications of new Discussion topics
> > and
> > replies to them delivered to your e-mail.
> >
> > You would not need to subscribe to all the traffic (i.e. the issues
> > related to development of OpenSSL would be still kept in Issues and
> > Pull requests). You can also reply to a thread by just replying to
> > the
> > notification e-mail. So there is actually no need to use a Web
> > browser
> > to read/reply on those discussions.
> >
>
>
>
> You get no history, no context. Must access the web interface to
> understand what you missed. Have you tried to use this as
> substitution?
I use the notifications for Issues and Pull requests and given I do not
remove e-mails that contain any useful information from the folder I
have these notifications in, I have quite good context in form of e-
mail threads containing these notifications. Yes, if somebody edits
their response, it won't trigger another notification, so this is not
perfect, but still I think it is pretty usable.
We are discussing a discussion medium not a review.
When I participate in a review I am fully engaged in that thread, although I prefer gerrit as a review platform, GitHub does provide some method of review and issue management.
However, the GitHub discussion is yet another forum interface, which is not transparent to email users. Users that use the web interface assume that the context exists as they see the context in the user interface. This, sooner than later the email users must migrate or abandon.
--
Tomáš Mráz, OpenSSL
