Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in Developer Relations and log of devrel meeting

[Bryan Østergaard]

On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 04:30:15PM +0000, Ferris McCormick wrote:
>
> A very few discussions must be private:  Consider that except for some
> documentation and policy, our only "product" is developers and the
> interactions among them, really.  Now, if we were of one mind, there
> would be no problem, but we are not --- we are individuals with
> individual approaches and philosophies (even the log which triggered
> this thread might give some indications of that).  Like it or not, this
> means that some discussions can include references to people which
> usually are not intended (the references; we can't speak to the history
> of the people), but in public might be injurious.  Obviously I am not
> going to elaborate, but you can probably imagine situations which can
> set off such discussions.
>
> Now, that said, we (devrel) agree that we do too much in private, and
> believe it or not, we try to avoid it (I think the log contains some
> mention of this, too).  So with the one (small, actually) exception
> outlined at length above, I think devrel pretty much agrees with
> ciaranm's observation; I believe it is our (informal) policy to work in
> public with -private as the exception.  This doesn't mean we always
> observe said "policy", but we are aware of the issues.  For example, I
> refer you to ribosome's observation in the log at 20:57 and kloeri's
> followup at 20:57 -- 58.
Agreed, we should try to keep as much as possible public and ensure as
much transparency as possible. That doesn't mean that there can't be
things we should keep confidential however.
>
> I should emphasize that I am speaking as an individual member of devrel,
> I am giving my own spin on things, and I do NOT speak here for devrel as
> a whole.
>
I'm speaking on behalf of devrel because I can :)

Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list