[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: contacting Debian is too easy to get wrong

On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 16:30 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > For specific (package) questions, assign to Individuals/Teams just like bug
> > reports.
> These should go to one of our support channels, package maintainers
> are for maintaining software/packages rather than answering questions.
> https://www.debian.org/support
> > Essentially, a Question Tracking System, similar to BTS. Launchpad has a
> > nice
> > "Ask Questions" feature.
> We already have ask.debian.net for that.

In my humble opinion, this is the problem. Today, we have too many options:

* Mailing List
* Web Forum
* Stackoverflow style ask.debian.net
* And many more, that I stopped worrying about.

Of these, I'm guessing many of us just don't follow debian-user, given its
volume (and noise).

When a user asks for a question, most usually end up on a web forum. Developers
mostly prefer monitoring hand-picked mailing lists only. That's where the
disconnect is, in my opinion.

What we need is to relate these interfaces to one another.

A couple years ago, with Drupal (6), I built a similar setup for my ex-employer, 
where in users could post messages through web forum (or mailing list). The
topic gets a forum id, as well as is converted into an email and sent to a
mailing list.

For Debian, something similar would be nice.
A user could ask a question, on say, multipath-tools, on the web forum. The same
goes to debian-questions@l.d.o as well as to the multipath-tools maintainer
(similar to like bug reports). This way, the maintainer could answer, and so
could other people subscribed to the debian-questions mailing list.

PS: I hope to not have hijacked your thread. Your ask, in this email thread, is
different than what I've been wanting to see for Debian.

Given the large number of mailing lists I follow, I request you to CC
me in replies for quicker response

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: