[llvm-foundation] Purpose of this list

[Tanya Lattner via llvm-foundation]

I’m not sure what the right answer is. I say just post what you wish here and we can decide if it needs a different or larger audience (or when). I just created it as a place to discuss LLVM foundation and anything related to it. Most of the topics below would fit into that category. 

-Tanya

> On May 23, 2016, at 11:06 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-foundation <llvm-foundation at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> It would be good to have a list of topics that are on/off for this
> list, as I really didn't get the idea right.
> 
> A few things I imagine _could_ be on topic:
> 
> * Discussions about the US and Euro LLVM meetings' _organization_? We
> currently use CC for all people, and that definitely doesn't scale.
> The llvm-devmeeting would probably remain as announcements? Or maybe
> that'd be better as a separate list?
> 
> * Infrastructure plans? We already have llvm-admin@ for problems and
> requests, but this list could be used for more mid/long term planning
> (not big discussions, final decisions)? Seems like Tanya agree.
> 
> * Inclusion initiatives? We don't have a proper channel for that yet,
> but I wouldn't see an add for a "women in tech" conference or
> initiative in this list as spam or even off topic. I think this is the
> right channel...
> 
> As both Chris and Tanya suggested, more critical discussions
> (policies, tools) should take place in the main lists, but there is
> one issue with that (and this is really just an innocent proposal):
> 
> People complained about threads like the code of conduct, commit
> message policy, and others that are important to the project, but not
> to all developers. They found that they are very disruptive, and that
> we could keep it in a separate place. But important discussions cannot
> happen on a side list, so maybe, we could reach a middle-ground...
> 
> What if we kept those discussions here, but sent a few warning
> messages to the main lists, that the discussion was happening,
> throughout the development of the discussion?
> 
> Example: on the code of conduct, a warning call that, all interested
> in discussing should subscribe to this list.
> 
> Then, as we reach milestones, summary emails could be sent out. We
> probably only had one milestone, so not much spam, but a short summary
> can attract people if they feel we diverged too much.
> 
> In the end, no decision is taken unless people agree on the main
> lists. The final call for decision has to include the archived threads
> of all discussions, and a short list of recommendations, so people
> that weren't included can still take an informed decision.
> 
> Overall, three well written emails to the main lists, while 100s of
> emails (some flames) were all kept away from the core purpose of the
> community, which is to produce software. :)
> 
> Of course, the final email can side-track and a whole new discussion
> start again, but if we manage to keep most of it in a separate list,
> still with visibility to the main lists, it's a positive change,
> right?
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> cheers,
> --renato
> 
> PS: To avoid misunderstandings, this is a request for comment, and
> some opinions to support my request.
> PS2: I'm opening a new thread as to not hijack the other.
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-foundation mailing list
> llvm-foundation at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-foundation