1 |
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 15:39 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 07:12:56 -0700 Josh Saddler <nightmorph@g.o> |
3 |
> wrote: |
4 |
> | > Uh, read again. You missed the point. I'm not talking about the |
5 |
> | > logged meetings here. I'm talking about the goings on in a certain |
6 |
> | > private IRC channel. |
7 |
> | |
8 |
> | You're just pissy because you weren't invited to the party. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Naah. As anyone in devrel will tell you, someone forwards me complete |
11 |
> logs of the private devrel IRC channel, all the email sent to the alias |
12 |
> and spycam footage of their orgies. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Seriously though, devrel keeping things private probably isn't a good |
15 |
> idea even if they're not using said private things to plot behind |
16 |
> people's backs any more. Given that they've done it in the past, it |
17 |
> only lends credibility to people who're claiming that devrel are out to |
18 |
> get them for personal reasons... |
19 |
> |
20 |
|
21 |
A very few discussions must be private: Consider that except for some |
22 |
documentation and policy, our only "product" is developers and the |
23 |
interactions among them, really. Now, if we were of one mind, there |
24 |
would be no problem, but we are not --- we are individuals with |
25 |
individual approaches and philosophies (even the log which triggered |
26 |
this thread might give some indications of that). Like it or not, this |
27 |
means that some discussions can include references to people which |
28 |
usually are not intended (the references; we can't speak to the history |
29 |
of the people), but in public might be injurious. Obviously I am not |
30 |
going to elaborate, but you can probably imagine situations which can |
31 |
set off such discussions. |
32 |
|
33 |
Now, that said, we (devrel) agree that we do too much in private, and |
34 |
believe it or not, we try to avoid it (I think the log contains some |
35 |
mention of this, too). So with the one (small, actually) exception |
36 |
outlined at length above, I think devrel pretty much agrees with |
37 |
ciaranm's observation; I believe it is our (informal) policy to work in |
38 |
public with -private as the exception. This doesn't mean we always |
39 |
observe said "policy", but we are aware of the issues. For example, I |
40 |
refer you to ribosome's observation in the log at 20:57 and kloeri's |
41 |
followup at 20:57 -- 58. |
42 |
|
43 |
I should emphasize that I am speaking as an individual member of devrel, |
44 |
I am giving my own spin on things, and I do NOT speak here for devrel as |
45 |
a whole. |
46 |
|
47 |
Regards, |
48 |
Ferris |
49 |
-- |
50 |
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o> |
51 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc) |