[hibernate-dev] Forum changes proposal

[Steve Ebersole]

I just sent the request.


On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 12:26 PM Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>
wrote:

> On 10 December 2015 at 17:48, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:43 AM Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10 December 2015 at 15:24, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org>
> wrote:
> >> > BTW, there is already a hibernate-users mailing list hosted on the
> JBoss
> >> > Mailman instance.  Back when we moved to JBoss Mailman they used to
> set
> >> > up a
> >> > number of lists by default.  We just chose to not really use this one
> in
> >> > particular.  We could use this one for purpose discussed here.
> >>
> >> Yes, that would be nice. I'm registered on that list, and there have
> >> been questions already although they are extremely rare - I recall
> >> something like 3 a year? - probably because I don't think its
> >> existance was ever advertised.
> >
> >
> > Not sure.  Mailman is not great at showing "list statistics".  Actually
> it
> > kind of sucks as an archive (not searchable, segmented, etc).
> >
> > http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/hibernate-users/
> >
> >
> >> > BTW, I looked into creating a Hibernate SO Team.  Are we thinking one
> >> > team?
> >> > Or one per project (ORM, OGM, etc)?
> >>
> >> Depends on how it works? I do monitor various tags, including
> >> "hibernate", "hibernate-search", "hibernate-ogm" and sometimes do a
> >> cross-check query like "hibernate" + "lucene", although others on our
> >> team often arrive first to answer.
> >>
> >> If the intent of the feature is to distribute the load among people to
> >> answer and monitor such tags, then I guess you're not interested in
> >> being notified for the Lucene related ones?
> >>
> >> From what I understand here:
> >>  -
> >>
> http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/307513/the-power-of-teams-a-proposed-expansion-of-stack-overflow
> >>
> >> It looks like it's more about showing off our affiliation, and to
> >> create a space were people can ask questions "about the team".
> >> So I'd say a single team unless I misunderstood things.
> >
> >
> > That would be my vote as well: one team
>
> Let's start with one then!
> If future features warrant a more fine-grained approach for some
> practicality reasons, we'll consider making sub-groups as an addition,
> but I guess in terms of community it makes sense to build up a single
> strong brand.
>
> Will you set it up?
>