betatim
commented
5 years ago What problem or pain point are we trying to address with this?
Open choldgraf opened 5 years ago
betatim
commented
5 years ago What problem or pain point are we trying to address with this?
choldgraf
commented
5 years ago updated the first post w/ an answer to your question - the short version is that it addresses the same reason that we created the Discourse in the first place: to have a location for more general conversation that isn't directly actionable in the repositories. Within a sub-project, there is often community-wide conversation as well as inter-team conversation, which is why I'm proposing to have a team-specific sub-channel.
choldgraf
commented
5 years ago just a note that there's now a public team discussion channel in the Discourse:
https://discourse.jupyter.org/c/jupyterhub/team
There's not official rule about using it or not, but wanted to note its existence :-)
Hey all - in #167 we realized that some rooms had been created in the Discourse for team conversations, but that we'd never discussed whether people thought this was a good idea or not :-)
How do team members feel about having a room in the Community Forum for general teams discussion?
This would be a place to have more general conversation and team chatter. And then we would leave the github issues for actionable team issues (similar to what we've done with github repositories on tech projects).
A few questions:
An example of projects doing similar things are Rust, which has a community discourse and an internals discourse for chatting about rust language design etc. We're not proposing two different Discourses here, but you get the idea.
What is the problem this is trying to solve?
The main thing I think this could improve is that there isn't a good place to have general discussion amongst the JupyterHub teams. We currently have team-compass as a repository of information, and use the issues as a place for both actionable items and general conversation. In the same manner as our technical repositories, this leads to a conflation of "to-do" issues that need specific discussion (https://github.com/jupyterhub/team-compass/issues/133) and more general conversations and discussion that will happen over time (e.g., https://github.com/jupyterhub/team-compass/issues/136). In particular, I think the latter category is more well-suited to a format like Discourse and it would keep the "issues" part of this repository more oriented towards things to "fix and close". It also gives us a place to have more informal conversation that's directed towards the team (one could argue that you could have this kind of conversation in other places on the Discourse, but in practice I don't expect everybody on the team to watch all of the other places in the Discourse, while I would expect people to be "watching" conversations that happen in the "team channel")