Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move from Gitter to CNCF Slack #1624

Closed
ocelotl opened this issue Feb 23, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1650
Closed

Move from Gitter to CNCF Slack #1624

ocelotl opened this issue Feb 23, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1650
Assignees
Labels
discussion Issue or PR that needs/is extended discussion. meta Related to repo itself, process, community, ...

Comments

@ocelotl
Copy link
Contributor

ocelotl commented Feb 23, 2021

The community seems to be moving away from Gitter and into Slack for DMs and discussions. We may want to follow the same path.

There are several opentelemetry-related channels already at Slack. We could open # otel-python too.

Now, in my personal opinion, I would prefer to move to Slack. I find Gitter less feature-rich and a bit buggy. I also use Slack already for work so, I would prefer to have only one tool for messaging.

We can discuss this in the next SIG, in the meantime please leave comments below with your thoughts.

@ocelotl ocelotl added discussion Issue or PR that needs/is extended discussion. meta Related to repo itself, process, community, ... labels Feb 23, 2021
@lzchen
Copy link
Contributor

lzchen commented Feb 25, 2021

Work items:

Remove "Gitter" from our docs.
Update CONTRIBUTING.md, and update with process outlined here

@codeboten
Copy link
Contributor

The channel exists here: https://cloud-native.slack.com/archives/C01PD4HUVBL

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion Issue or PR that needs/is extended discussion. meta Related to repo itself, process, community, ...
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants