Move es-discuss to discuss.webplatform.org?
OMG Yes please!!!
No, thank you.
Email clients are the ultimate forum aggregators.
The only thing I don't like is the fact it's mixed with what's on discourse.specifiction.org. I post more on discourse.specifiction.org than on ES-Discuss, meaning I'm more comfortable bothering the people with my ideas there than on ES-Discuss.
Plainly because it's not always ES related. ES-Discuss sticks to Ecmascript related things. While on discourse.specifiction.org we can talk about a whole bunch of other things. Unless you guys plan on adding another category. But even then I don't think most will like that.
On Jun 19, 2015, at 5:12 PM, C. Scott Ananian <ecmascript at cscott.net> wrote:
No, thank you. Email clients are the ultimate forum aggregators.
+1 on “No, thank you". Email works, email has are full-featured clients, do not force browser use, etc, etc.
—ravi
Yes, please. Also if like to take issue with everyone who prefers email clients for the following reason: it's easier to allow people who want to keep using email to do so while enabling a richer and more aggressive experience for those who want it than it is the other way around
Discourse has the options to keep the same level of email reporting, daily aggregation and allowing for responses via mail.
I'm not sure I see the need for a new category there either, there are already:
- JS
- asm.js
- APIs
- Architecture
There are a fair few structured conversations there that would merit both communities working together.
Perhaps hooking in Robin into the conversation here might help.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 5:12 PM C. Scott Ananian <ecmascript at cscott.net>
wrote:
No, thank you.
Email clients are the ultimate forum aggregators.
I'm with Scott. Regardless, this conversation is a non-starter.
I'm with Scott. Regardless, this conversation is a non-starter.
I started it, because I care about es-discuss. More information would be nice as to why it is a non-starter.
C. Scott Ananian wrote:
No, thank you.
+1
The main problem I have with mailing lists is that, unless I'm mistaken, I cannot unsubscribe from specific threads. As an example, "The Tragedy of the Common Lisp, or, Why Large Languages Explode" is now 33 replies deep and I really don't care about it at all and would rather not get spammed by that thread. Is there a way for me to unsubscribe from it currently?
If some other platform can keep the great features of a mailing list but at the same time allow people to unsubscribe from spammy or not interesting threads then +1 for that other platform.
es-discourse.com already exists as an alternative place to discuss things if one doesn't wish to email this list. It may be worth exploring using that more fully before asking TC39 to consider an alternative to their existing mailing list.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Axel Rauschmayer <axel at rauschma.de> wrote: discourse.specifiction.org/t/upcoming-migration/805
Would it make sense to move es-discuss to that upcoming site? I’m not particularly fond of mailing lists and much prefer forums, especially discourse-based ones.
I actually asked myself the question a few weeks ago of why this discussion has to take place over a mailing list. My original guess was that it's because most people in the group have grown comfortable with it, and don't see a need for it to change. That happens to be sort of the vibe I'm getting from this thread so far too. I also imagine the sense of exclusivity is kind of nice, since mailing lists aren't something that are always publicly available (though we do have the es-discuss public site which aggregates everything in this case)
Anyway, before anyone shuts this down completely, I do think it would be worth considering using another platform to facilitate better discussion, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the one put forth in this thread. My motivation for migrating the discussion (if I were to push for it) would be about fostering a more open conversation about these topics, and I've always felt that web forums do a great job of this. But not all forums support a user-friendly way to subscribe/respond to threads via email, so I'm not sure if maybe someone else here has an experience with a similar platform that can give better reasons to switch. I think it would be nice to have a more organized platform for discussion to help isolate some of the lower level engine/grammar topics from the higher level syntax and such. I know some of you have been saying we could do this on our own anyway outside of this list, but it couldn't be in any official capacity without TC39 behind it, so I'd anticipate a lot of the conversation being for naught.
On 2015-06-20 16:14, Eric B <neurosnap at gmail.com> writes:
The main problem I have with mailing lists is that, unless I'm mistaken, I cannot unsubscribe from specific threads. As an example, "The Tragedy of the Common Lisp, or, Why Large Languages Explode" is now 33 replies deep and I really don't care about it at all and would rather not get spammed by that thread. Is there a way for me to unsubscribe from it currently?
I know how to do it with gnus (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/gnus/Scoring.html), other email clients may also have this feature.
Best,
Alan
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:44 AM Alan Schmitt <alan.schmitt at polytechnique.org>
wrote:
...other email clients may also have this feature.
And you can mute whole threads in Gmail (and Inbox).
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 5:21 PM, // ravi <ravi-lists at g8o.net> wrote:
On Jun 19, 2015, at 5:12 PM, C. Scott Ananian <ecmascript at cscott.net> wrote:
No, thank you. Email clients are the ultimate forum aggregators.
+1 on “No, thank you". Email works, email has are full-featured clients, do not force browser use, etc, etc.
I have to admit, I find this attitude somewhat ironic. The standards group for a major component of the browser avoiding browsers. I understand trying to avoid the replication of email. These days, there are a lot of communication platforms that don't interoperate, and so it may seem like email is still a universal client, and therefore who needs anything else - but seriously, are you all so cynical that the additional value gained means nothing? As long as discourse supports email notifications/responses, then I don't really see the compelling reason not to make the switch. The advantages of switching are numerous: better search, easier participations, easier organization/categorization of threads, better formatting/code highlighting, etc.
On Jun 22, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Russell Leggett <russell.leggett at gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 5:21 PM, // ravi <ravi-lists at g8o.net> wrote:
On Jun 19, 2015, at 5:12 PM, C. Scott Ananian <ecmascript at cscott.net> wrote:
No, thank you. Email clients are the ultimate forum aggregators.
+1 on “No, thank you". Email works, email has are full-featured clients, do not force browser use, etc, etc.
I have to admit, I find this attitude somewhat ironic. The standards group for a major component of the browser avoiding browsers. I understand trying to avoid the replication of email. These days, there are a lot of communication platforms that don't interoperate, and so it may seem like email is still a universal client, and therefore who needs anything else - but seriously, are you all so cynical that the additional value gained means nothing? As long as discourse supports email notifications/responses, then I don't really see the compelling reason not to make the switch. The advantages of switching are numerous: better search, easier participations, easier organization/categorization of threads, better formatting/code highlighting, etc.
Some of the criteria you offer are subjective and are in fact the reasons for me (and possibly others) to take the opposite position to yours (e.g: easier participation, easier categorisation). Without doubt there are advantages to a forum — for instance, as someone mentioned earlier, one can opt out of threads (an implementation detail, but an implementation that is lacking AFAIK in many email clients); also better formatting as you say. But there is not much irony here. JavaScript is no longer a browser-only language. Additionally, standards are the reason why we should all, ideally, not confine ourselves to the browser. Everything is not and should not be a “web app” and every application protocol should not be <proprietary>-over-HTTP.
This is a large can of worms I am happy to leave partially opened. I agree with you that if a discussion forum provides email delivery as well as the ability to respond via email, it would be near-indistinguishable for my needs from a mailing list server.
,
—raviIt's not too surprising: it's the same reason why the ES6 spec was just published on paper, with the html version being explicitly flagged as non-normative.
For standards work, having a reliable substrate is important. It is not the TC's job to innovate on or experiment with collaboration platforms.
Which isn't too say that much good work can't be done by an enthusiastic community on <name your platform>. Just that, at the end of the day, it
will be boiled down first to email, for broad distribution, then to face-to-face communication along TC members, then finally published on paper.
On Jun 22, 2015, at 12:51 PM, C. Scott Ananian <ecmascript at cscott.net> wrote:
It's not too surprising: it's the same reason why the ES6 spec was just published on paper, with the html version being explicitly flagged as non-normative.
Actually the above is not correct. Both the HTML and PDF renderings are generated from the same normative source document. Both rendering are considered normative by Ecma International.
What the HtML version ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0 says is:
"The PDF version is the definitive specification. Any discrepancies between this HTML rendering and the PDF rendering are unintentional."
That text is there be make it clear how disputes should be resolved in anybody thinks the two rendering disagree on any point. They don’, but just in case somebody wants to start a fight we have predetermined the outcome.
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On Jun 22, 2015, at 12:51 PM, C. Scott Ananian <ecmascript at cscott.net <mailto:ecmascript at cscott.net>> wrote:
It's not too surprising: it's the same reason why the ES6 spec was just published on paper, with the html version being explicitly flagged as non-normative.
Actually the above is not correct. Both the HTML and PDF renderings are generated from the same normative source document. Both rendering are considered normative by Ecma International.
What the HtML version ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0
says is:"The PDF version is the definitive specification. Any discrepancies between this HTML rendering and the PDF rendering are unintentional."That text is there be make it clear how disputes should be resolved in anybody thinks the two rendering disagree on any point. They don’, but just in case somebody wants to start a fight we have predetermined the outcome.
I guess C. Scott's point is more about email being decades older than Discourse (or other server-side/proprietary discussion software).
OTOH I know people (dherman, cough) who can't hack the email load of es-discuss, and do not like the well-known email tendency to have threads run off the rails into endless digression and argumentation.
But Arv's point about gmail mute feature is good. I think any competent email reader should have that.
If not, does Discourse support email as a first-class subscription mechanism? That (plus mute) might help.
If not, does Discourse support email as a first-class subscription mechanism? That (plus mute) might help.
I haven't used discourse a ton, but according to the features page:
http://www.discourse.org/about/
They support email notifications and replies, as well as an opt in "mailing list" mode:
Opt into a special mode where all messages are sent to you via email,
Yup the ability to subscribe to categories, ignore users and mute threads. Along with the ability to set digest periods.
Here are all the options I get in preferences:
Along with the ability to mute each thread too.
Let's talk about this at July's TC39 meeting. Maybe we can have best of both worlds, thanks to Discourse. (I don't think any such es-discuss replacement should be on webplatform.org, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C and Ecma streams.)
Having two es-dis{cuss,course} list-like things is not great. I hardly ever look at es-discourse.com, although I've known about it for a while. Does it lead to action with TC39 independent of what's raised here on es-discuss at mozilla.org, or directly at meetings by Ecma members?
OTOH I know people (dherman, cough) who can't hack the email load of es-discuss, and do not like the well-known email tendency to have threads run off the rails into endless digression and argumentation.
But Arv's point about gmail mute feature is good. I think any competent email reader should have that.
My biggest concern is that you can’t be selective in your consumption of es-discuss: It’s all or nothing (even if you only want to participate occasionally). The volume is daunting, esp. with a mobile device.
(I don't think any such es-discuss
replacement should be on webplatform.org, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C and Ecma streams.)
Is that such an issue? I was thinking the larger exposure and closer working would be a bigger benefit than the mail management options.
Jonathan Kingston wrote:
(I don't think any such es-discuss replacement should be on webplatform.org, webplatform.org, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C and Ecma streams.)
Is that such an issue? I was thinking the larger exposure and closer working would be a bigger benefit than the mail management options.
Different standard bodies, different IPR and other rules, different histories. That's enough for me to want a separate Discourse instance.
Maybe it could be hosted on esdiscuss.org.
Axel Rauschmayer wrote:
My biggest concern is that you can’t be selective in your consumption of es-discuss: It’s all or nothing (even if you only want to participate occasionally). The volume is daunting, esp. with a mobile device.
Long ago we had USENET and NNTP to help avoid having to read messages filed into folders. Mozilla ran bi-directional mail/news gateways. It sounds like Discourse can gateway to mail. Can it gateway from mail?
In any case, your point is good. We can't just read esdiscuss.org, even though it tries to support editing and replying in situ (IIRC). It has a few bugs where its nice abstractions leak messy email details.
On Jun 23, 2015, at 1:24 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:
Jonathan Kingston wrote:
(I don't think any such es-discuss replacement should be on webplatform.org, webplatform.org, FWIW -- that crosses the W3C and Ecma streams.)
Is that such an issue? I was thinking the larger exposure and closer working would be a bigger benefit than the mail management options.
Different standard bodies, different IPR and other rules, different histories. That's enough for me to want a separate Discourse instance.
Maybe it could be hosted on esdiscuss.org.
Or perhaps ecaa could host.
A concern is the long term survivability of the archives. I’m fairly confident that mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss, mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss will be around for a long time. I’m less confident about about esdiscuss.org, esdiscuss.org or es-discourse.com, es-discourse.com
Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
Or perhaps ecaa could host.
Ecma? HAHAHAHA! Ahem. Sorry. Judging from the IT outsourcing our people in Geneva do, I can only say: nope!
Am I being unfair? Their Francs are as gold/green/orange/etc. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_the_Swiss_franc) as anyone's. They could buy some cloud infra that's well devop'ed. But they haven't done this and seem to have no experience with it, or idea of it. I wouldn't want to be their learning experience.
A concern is the long term survivability of the archives. I’m fairly confident that mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss will be around for a long time. I’m less confident about about esdiscuss.org, esdiscuss.org or es-discourse.com, es-discourse.com
Fair point. Someone needs to step up, who does have the factory-IT bona-fides (on devops side; I agree Ecma can pay the bills). Anyone?
On 19 June 2015 at 23:04, Axel Rauschmayer <axel at rauschma.de> wrote:
discourse.specifiction.org/t/upcoming-migration/805
Would it make sense to move es-discuss to that upcoming site? I’m not particularly fond of mailing lists and much prefer forums, especially discourse-based ones.
Another -1 from me, sorry. Other than being new & shiny, forums introduce more problems than they fix (like, account/login inflation, broken threading, no offline reading or half-assed mail gateways, etc).
We had this discussion before. I'm still wondering what problem moving to a forum would actually solve.
discourse.specifiction.org/t/upcoming-migration/805, discourse.specifiction.org/t/upcoming-migration/805
Would it make sense to move es-discuss to that upcoming site? I’m not particularly fond of mailing lists and much prefer forums, especially discourse-based ones.