Should an organization that develops multiple Kotl...
# meta
c
Should an organization that develops multiple Kotlin libraries have one channel per library, or a single channel for the organization itself?
y
Kotlin develops both Kotlinx coroutines and ktor, and there's a channel each, soo... More seriously, it'd likely depend on 1) how different in scope the libraries are and 2) how big of a user base you have. Arrow for instance has #arrow and #arrow-contributors and #arrow-meta. Arrow meta was very different to the main Arrow "stuff" and hence rightfully needed its own channel.
c
1. I'd say they are quite different. Anything from caching, to testing, to UI stuff. All of them are meant to interoperate well with each other though, so in that way they are similar. 2. Nowhere near Arrow 😅 Very limited at the moment, but that's the life of small utilities… Having a presence on the Kotlin Slack is one of the best way to show something to the community.
l
I'd say it depends on the organization model. If each project is completely independent and maintained by different communities / quasi-different teams/maintaineres then one per channel is fine for me. If the whole organization is a single 'framework'/'grouping' then a single channel would probably make more sense
https://github.com/korlibs/korge Korge/Korlibs is quite on top of the limit line for me. Multiple libs, but all part of the same grouping
c
It's similar to Korlibs in a way. It's a single team, the common point is "what we needed to make some other project but couldn't find in the ecosystem already, so we made a new thing for it". The things themselves are quite different from each other, but there is this kind of main focus
e
I think it depends on the context. #squarelibraries works well, but I can imagine other cases where that wouldn't work so well.
j
IMO if the channel is too active with different topics it would be interesting to create multiple channels, but it is not the usual case.