3
$\begingroup$

Should I use this site to discuss questions that are really specific to ROS or should I keep using answers.ros.org? This same question can be asked for any other libraries / framework I'm using: should I use this site or should I use the one specifically targeted at this community?

Cheers,

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Since ROS has no affiliation with the SX network of sites, you're likely get a different user base (with obviously some overlap) so I'd feel free to cross-post once you don't get an answer within a reasonable time frame.

I also don't see any problem with asking detailed ROS questions here, even if a specific Q&A site exists for that topic elsewhere on the internet. SE sites are supposed to be expert sites, and stackoverflow, to take but one example, covers a far wider array of topics than robotics.SE does while still eliciting highly detailed questions and answers (just look for any answer involving disassembly of a program to resolve compiler intricacies). If people tend to get better answers on ros.org, they'll migrate to there naturally and vice versa.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Taking a brief look at answers.ros.org it appears to be an Askbot based Q&A site created by ros.org to support their community.

As a more vertical site, you may get more ROS specific answers there, but equally ROS is perfectly on topic here. Just because you could ask a ROS question there shouldn't stop you from asking it here.

Similarly though, we shouldn't be trying to steal traffic from answers.ros.org.

Personally I don't think Askbot (or OSQA) based Q&A sites work as well as a properly defined, committed and public beta'd Stack exchange site, but then they are still playing catch-up, both technology and community maturity wise.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Not sure I understand entirely: if the goal is not to still traffic from answers.ros.org or other specific Q&A site, it surely means that I shouldn't ask it here? I see only 3 possible cases: 1. we aim to replace the framework specific Q&As so we ask all questions here, 2. we think that keeping specific Q&As is more productive, so we focus on framework agnostic questions, 3. we aim wide and people double-post here and on their specific Q&A site to make sure their question is read and answered. I personally don't like option 3. but I'm not sure whether we should aim for 1. or 2. $\endgroup$ – Ugo Oct 24 '12 at 10:48
  • $\begingroup$ We shouldn't aim to replace framework Q&A's however if the commmunity for that framework finds our site more useful than their own community Q&A site then we shouldn't turn them away either. I certainly wouldn't encourage multi-posting between Stack exchange and non stack exchange Q&A sites, just as I wouldn't encourage multi-posting between Stack exchange sites, but I'm happy for answerers on one site to reference an answer on another sites, as long at they are properly attributed, just as we prefer to include material from non Q&A resources. $\endgroup$ – Mark Booth Oct 24 '12 at 11:09
  • $\begingroup$ OK thanks for that it clarifies things a bit. I still have a question. When I say "should we aim to replace..." I mean us as the precursors of this forum. So I think we should have some kind of official position about this for the beta phase. No? By this I mean to ask whether we start asking all the very technical details about how to do this in this framework, or if we prefer to leave those questions out of here, and stick to questions that are still technical, but more about robotics in general (ie which algorithm vs which package in ROS). Am I making sense? $\endgroup$ – Ugo Oct 24 '12 at 11:22
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I think highly detailed questions are perfectly fine here, even if a specific Q&A site exists for that topic elsewhere on the internet. SE sites are supposed to be expert sites, and stackoverflow, to take but one example, covers a far wider array of topics than robotics.SE does while eliciting highly detailed questions and answers (just look for any answer involving disassembly of a program to resolve compiler intricacies). If people tend to get better answers on ros.org, they'll go there naturally. $\endgroup$ – ThomasH Oct 26 '12 at 9:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .