Take the 2-minute tour ×
Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Why do many open source projects collaborate primarily through mailing lists rather than through, say, forums? I may be ignorant in my assessment, but I, along with my communication teacher, think mailing lists are rather inefficient:

  • It's hard to reference old messages. You have to wait until an archiving site picks up the message you want to link to, then look it up.
  • It's hard to reply to messages you haven't received from subscription, since you have to manually copy the sender and message contents.
  • It's impossible to moderate threads of discussion. Posts cannot be deleted or modified without supernatural powers.
  • It's tricky to keep threads together (namely, to ensure all participants in the conversation are copied/replied to).
  • It's tricky for users to participate in multiple high-volume mailing lists, as they have to subscribe and set up filters (or just be really involved).

What real edge do mailing lists have that didn't occur to me?

share|improve this question
16  
+1. I've always wondered this as well. Being a new graduate, I find it much easier to communicate using forums rather than mailing lists. I suppose the older crowd is more comfortable using what they are used to? –  Brian D. Apr 25 '11 at 17:39
13  
Mailing lists is one of a few things which I was never able to understand. It is simply unusable in my eyes. –  user8685 Apr 25 '11 at 18:17
4  
Here, here. I HATE mailing lists, unfortunately the nature of my work requires me to use them occasionally. –  Mr. Shickadance Apr 25 '11 at 18:28
2  
"It's tricky to keep threads together (namely, to ensure all participants in the conversation are copied/replied to)." You don't reply to the participants. You reply to the list. –  back2dos Apr 25 '11 at 20:06
4  
@Joey, when you have participated in several projects with some communications you will find that it is nice that all your correspondence go in a local medium in a program which is designed for discussions. Web forums tend to work best with linear threads, not with longer discussions ending up in multiple sub-threads. Also the "come to me" aspect is important if you actually do other things than monitor forums. Personally I have not found a single forum I've liked seen from a technical point of view. –  user1249 Apr 25 '11 at 20:44
show 9 more comments

9 Answers

up vote 33 down vote accepted

In addition to the "because they are used to it" arguments, email has a few other huge advantages:

  1. You already have an email address, no need to sign up for yet another messageboard account for every project.
  2. With a messageboard, you have to actively visit the page and refresh it to see new messages. On the other hand, most people have their email client (Outlook, Mail, Gmail) open all day and it refreshes automatically as soon as a new message comes in.

In short, using a messageboard requires me to change my habits in a significant way. On the other hand, mailing lists fit simply & easily into my existing routine, so adoption is much easier.

share|improve this answer
14  
Doesn't RSS, which is compatible with some email clients, invalidate 2. ? –  Nathanael Sensfelder Apr 25 '11 at 19:35
1  
You still need to run a rss client, but virtually everybody reads email all the time. –  EricSchaefer Apr 25 '11 at 19:48
6  
#2 is particularly true for low traffic boards/lists. You dont want to have to remember to check 20 different boards, each which may get only a couple posts a week. A board with such low traffic never reaches the critical mass necessary to have a dedicated group of users who can answer questions. A list, on the other hand, pushes out posts so everyone sees them. –  GrandmasterB Apr 25 '11 at 20:09
2  
@Cheshire: maybe it's my problem, but I find RSS for forums absolutely unusable, since you get posts from different threads mixed up. With a decent email client (even Gmail) posts are grouped and even shown as a tree. Sure, you can use RSS just to warn you and then visit the website, but that's more annoying than having them "just there." –  André Paramés Apr 25 '11 at 21:22
1  
@Anto: I've heard of this nifty protocol for asynchronous message delivery called SMTP… –  Donal Fellows Apr 25 '11 at 22:42
show 9 more comments

The Real Edge (tm) that mailing lists have is with less busy projects. In order for a web based forum to be successful, it needs a core of people constantly present who can respond to questions, provide suggestions, and moderate it. But if a board only has a couple posts a week or month, many people interested in the topic (be it an open source project, a commercial project, hobby, whatever) wont regularly visit the board because there's rarely anything new there.

What ends up happening then, is the board becomes what you might call a b-tch session. People only go there to post a bug report or when they have a problem/complaint. But since not a lot of people are visiting regularly, you just end up with a lot of complaints/problems without responses, and very little community building.

If you have a mailing list, those questions, rather than being seen by only the small subset of members who think to visit the web forum that week, are delivered to everyone on the list. They are much more likely to be seen by someone who can actually answer the question.

Once the project gets large enough, moving to a board often makes sense, as at that point people are getting deluged with email.

imo, my favorite way of organizing these things is via newsgroups, but they have fallen out of favor. Groups allowed you, with a newsreader, to see all the new topics on all the groups you follow (benefit of the email list), but with the threaded discussion capability of a web forum. Unfortunately, particularly among non-technical people, requiring users to have a newsreader and set up the groups is a total no-go.

share|improve this answer
2  
Google provide a forum-like interface to newsgroups. I've used it for years (after I lost a good NNTP provider). –  Donal Fellows Apr 25 '11 at 22:44
2  
Absolutely true. Forums are terrible for low volume topics. TBH I find them overrated in general, but they just don't work without a certain treshold of traffic. Mailing lists don't have that problem. –  Tridus Apr 26 '11 at 0:31
2  
Most forums have e-mail notification option. –  Calmarius Feb 14 '13 at 11:59
add comment

It's hard to reference old messages. You have to wait until an archiving site picks up the message you want to link to, then look it up.

Assuming your listserv is working properly, this isn't an issue, since we're talking about old messages (referencing new messages might be problematic).

It's hard to reply to messages you haven't received from subscription, since you have to manually copy the sender and message contents.

If only someone would design a feature - perhaps even one integrated into the OS shell itself - for easily selecting and duplicating text. Perhaps it could be modeled after some increasingly-anachronistic real-world activity, like scrapbooking.

(I'm not actually sure what you're referring to here; continuing private threads in public tends to be a manual operation regardless of the software involved)

It's impossible to moderate threads of discussion. Posts cannot be deleted or modified without supernatural powers.

The reverse argument is that it's much harder for a rogue list owner to re-write history by deleting portions of the conversation that disagree with him, since one or more users will likely have their own copies.

It's tricky to keep threads together (namely, to ensure all participants in the conversation are copied/replied to).

Proper client software should handle this easily, as well as provide more flexible display and ordering of threads than most web-forum software allows.

It's tricky for users to participate in multiple high-volume mailing lists, as they have to subscribe and set up filters (or just be really involved).

High-volume forums are no easier. If anything, it's harder (if not impossible) to configure filters in web-forum packages. Either you're "really involved", or you're probably missing something.

What real edge do mailing lists have that didn't occur to me?

Privacy by default, without "yet another website account". Quick to set up. A natural progression from informal email chains as the group grows. No breaking context to move from email to web when processing replies. Familiar to almost everyone (yeah, yeah, Korean kids / the Facebook generation don't use email...)

share|improve this answer
add comment

I prefer mailing lists over forums because it's easier. Forums require me to actively go out and do something extra (namely visit yet another web site) repeatedly. Whereas a mailing list sends the messages right to someplace I always have to have open anyways. Single point of contact (mailing list) vs. multiple points (forums). Interrupt driven (mailing list) vs. polling (forums).

There does seem to be a generational thing going on here, but I don't know that it's so much "what you've grown up with" as it is "the stage of life you're in". Now that I'm older, I've got so many more (outside of computer-land) obligations that I just don't have the time anymore to actively go and seek out forums. If it just comes into my mailbox though, it gets handled.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Most of all for flexibility -- it's easy to provide a web-based archive of a mailing list, while still allowing users to use their email client of choice to interact.

Going with a forum instead not only chooses a web-based view for historical messages (easy to provide with either technology!), but locks the users into using a web-based tool for interacting with the forum.

Put differently, using the web to interact with an email-based forum is a solved problem; using email to interact with a web-based forum? Not so much.

Now consider that many developers may routinely follow a dozen or two forums, and consider which is more attractive -- setting up a unique login and password for each one, and learning a separate user interface for each one, or interacting with all of them via an identity you've already long established (your email address), using one tool to see (and archive, and search) them all?

share|improve this answer
2  
-1 This is somehow wrong. "while still allowing users to use their email client of choice to interact" - a web-based forum allows you to use a browser of your choice instead. "locks the users into using a web-based tool". No, a forum may allow to use emails, or web, or both, or whatever. No advantage for email here. "that many developers may routinely follow a dozen or two forums" - I'm following a dozen of forums on groups.google.com with a single account. –  maaartinus Apr 25 '11 at 19:43
    
@maaartinus: "a web-based forum allows you to use a browser of your choice instead." Browsers understand pages, not messages, so they're not nearly as flexible as an email client displaying/filtering them. "I'm following a dozen of forums on groups.google.com with a single account." But then you have to: 1) be locked to Google Groups, instead of having distributed servers, or run your own, and 2) use their interface, instead of being able to choose. –  André Paramés Apr 25 '11 at 21:29
4  
@maaartinus: a Google Groups group is pretty much a mailing list with a web interface. You might argue that this gives you most of the benefits of both systems, and you would be right. –  Shog9 Apr 25 '11 at 21:39
    
@André Paramés: I'm actually happier with google groups (in any browser) than with Thunderbird. Do you mean "locked" or "logged"? In case of logged, yes, but storing my password for the site in "magical wand" is no worse than storing it in the Email client, and logging in is fast. I agree with the rest. –  maaartinus Apr 25 '11 at 21:47
1  
@maartinus -- the difference is that you can choose an email client whose interface you're comfortable with. Any non-broken browser will show approximately the same user interface for a forum, however -- and, worse, a different user interface for each forum implementation out there. –  jimwise Apr 28 '11 at 15:06
show 1 more comment

Because no-one has created a better way to do it. By better i mean suited and able to integrate in current development environments.

Maybe Google Wave was in some way a more proper tool but it didn't take off.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Bare email in itself already has everything you want. Responding to a specific message, quoting a specific passage, forwarding an interesting post to a friend of yours. On top of that, you can add anything you want.

Everybody programmer has email. And most of them use a decent mail client. A client they chose and they like. A client that aggregates their news feeds, their personal mail, their work mail. And their mailing list mail. Using a forum only introduces unnecessary fragmentation.

Proper email clients give you all the features you want (bookmarking, filtering, tagging, marking read/unread (something you can't do in forums)). They work the same for any kind of email.

So a mailing list leaves control to its users, while a forum locks them in the limited features it provides. Programmers like to stay in control. Thus they have a tendency to prefer mailing lists.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Habit - Several people post questions about generating interest in open source projects. Sometimes you start with a mailing list of people you know and never switch over to something else.

For the users:

  • easier to flame mispellings with spell checker (gotcha)
  • easier to complain to list admin
  • They have memorized the 'alt' sites they recommend

You can find the joke here: http://www.ahajokes.com/com009.html

share|improve this answer
add comment

For the same reason they use vim or Emacs: technological conservatism.

Also mailing lists provide a "lowest common denominator" interface. And the fact that they can scare off less motivated people can be a Good Thing (less trolls).

share|improve this answer
8  
No-one who uses vim does so because of technological conservatism. –  user16764 Apr 25 '11 at 17:35
11  
I do not use Vim because of technological conservatism but because of it being a superior editor to everything else I have tried. I would change the first sentence in this answer if I were you. –  Anto Apr 25 '11 at 17:40
    
Same here. In fact, I've only started using it a couple years ago, so it's hardly "conservatism." –  André Paramés Apr 25 '11 at 21:32
1  
@Anto and others: this is my opinion and it will stay the way it is written. Your denial will not change my mind. Downvoters, bring it on! –  quant_dev Apr 26 '11 at 6:38
2  
I think people keep using vim & emacs for the same reason I prefer Windows text editors: we are most productive with the tools we're used to. I'm pretty fast at text editing in Visual Studio because I have a lot of practice (e.g. muscle memory), and I'd be slow in emacs or vim. Emacs or vim users would be slow in Visual Studio for the same reason. Now, maybe if the various editors would let you use competitors' keyboard interfaces, we could switch between them more freely. –  Qwertie Jan 23 '12 at 21:11
show 5 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.