Tim,
My two cents… and of course, some of this depends on how much time you really
want to invest in all of this… ☺
There is a lot of benefit in maintaining the Oracle specific focus of ORACLE-L:
– Technology specific content means that there is less sifting through
the “cross-pollination” of topics to get to the technology specific question
you have. Purity is important I think.
– I would suspect that technology specific lists will attract those who
specialize in those specific technologies. A pure stack is probably likely to
get more authoritive answers than a watered down stack.
o I’ve seen technology neutral boards/lists often provide inaccurate
information posted by folks who are not spending a lot of time with the
technology they offer answers on. I think you would see a lot more “I think” or
“I guess” kinds of answers.
o I’ve also seen technology neutral boards/lists have holy wars about the
various stacks, that are no fun. Granted, many of those threads eventually get
policed.
– In many cases, standards, processes, terminology and other things
differ across stacks. This could confuse beginners. Things in the Oracle world
change fast enough – multiply that several times for each additional stack you
add to the mailing list.
– You have beginners here often, and I’d be concerned that
cross-technology/stack posting could get confusing for them.
– With all of the stacks, there is such depth and breadth that I’d be
afraid a less focused mailing list would become less useful.
– A less focused technology list will be harder to search for the answer
you are looking for.
This reasoning extends to other active and emerging database stacks, they
should have their own lists.
Then the question that comes to my mind is, can we have our cake and eat it too?
Why not source, from these DB specific lists, a consolidated and searchable
list from all database specific lists? Something like DBALL-L. I would think
that it would be easy to automate the copying of threads to such a list? This
would be helpful for those who want to look for topics related to more than one
stack.
I am debating if one should allow posts in the DBALL-L list… That would require
some level of moderation to ensure that posts don’t really belong in a database
specific list, though I do suggest a possible DBINTEGRATION-L list that could
be the place to post cross-platform questions.
Second, (just thinking aloud here) with respect to social media - Is there some
way that we can integrate lists like ORACLE-L into social media platforms like
twitter, facebook and linked in (and maybe that’s already done in some way – I
have largely removed myself from social media – I just was finding the signal
to noise ratio - inefficient)?
Is there some way to integrate the technologies so that we can actually improve
the usability of all of them? Perhaps such a thing is more effort that it’s
worth…. I just wonder if there is an ORACLE-L post, if there should not be some
related tweet that goes out to the ORACLE-L twitter subscribers with maybe a
subject and link to the post (just thinking aloud here – there could be great
arguments not to do this). Or a Linked in daily post with the digest contents
of Oracle-L…?
Along with ORACLE-L or MSSQL-L I think there is a good argument for a few other
lists? (depending on how many lists one wants to have/manage).
For example:
– DBALL-L – Integrated list of all *-L lists for those who love super
cross-pollination.
– DBINTEGRATION-L - List services for those trying to integrate stacks. I
think such a list could certainly be cross-stack.
– DBMIGRATION-L – List services for those migrating between database
stacks.
– DBCLOUD-L – List services specific to database cloud offerings
– DATASCIENCE-L – List services related to data science topics.
– DBREPLICATION-L – List services related to replication services like
Golden Gate or Shareplex
– DBRETIREEARLY-L – Self-explanatory – Currently among my favorite list
ideas.
I guess, in part, all of this really boils down to what is the need of the
community? What will drive them to use the tool that has been so wonderful in
the past – Namely Oracle-L.
My thoughts…. VMMV….. Cheers!!
RF
Robert G. Freeman
Deliverer of Data
Businessolver
Cell: 801-703-3405
Anon: Science. If you don’t make mistakes, you’re doing it wrong. If you don’t
correct those mistakes, you’re doing it really wrong. If can’t accept that
you’re mistaken, you’re not doing it at all.
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of Stefan Knecht
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 10:48 AM
To: Tim Gorman <tim.evdbt@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ORACLE-L <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: From ORACLE-L to DATABASE-L?
Personally, my vote would be oracle-only. Perhaps add a second list maintained
with the same style that is for other DBMS.
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Zahir Mohideen
<zahir.dba@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:zahir.dba@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Tim -
it is a great idea to expand oracle_l to database_l .
My question is , if we were to expand , are we restricting the discussions to
RDBMS only or include NOSQL dbs as well.
Usually , we ( I am also in SQL server side ) communicate in Twitter with
#sqlhelp tag .
- Zahir
Zahir Mohideen
http://mfzahirdba.blogspot.com/
Nothing so GREAT was achieved without enthusiasm
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Tim Gorman
<tim.evdbt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:tim.evdbt@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
So, of course, I ask Oracle people about it. :)