| 1 |
>>>>> On Sat, 16 Jul 2011, Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 16.07.2011 11:14, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 4 |
>> I asked yesterday but I think I never got a reply. Which is the best way |
| 5 |
>> to discuss such things? Is it ML or alias? Is there a rule on "which" |
| 6 |
>> topics go public on ML and which stay private on alias? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> In the past the alias has been used for purely administrative stuff |
| 9 |
> like this and actual content items on public ml (for example |
| 10 |
> gentoo-project) so that developers/users can express their opinion. |
| 11 |
> Like with gentoo-core I think we should avoid discussing technical |
| 12 |
> issues etc. in private. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Right, the default should be to discuss things in public. There used |
| 15 |
to be the gentoo-council list for this, but now I'm being told that it |
| 16 |
shouldn't be used, but discussions should go to gentoo-project |
| 17 |
instead. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
IMHO this doesn't make much sense, as gentoo-project traditionally was |
| 20 |
used for non-technical matters (in fact, its description still says |
| 21 |
so). Looking into the archives, most topics on that list aren't |
| 22 |
related to the council. I would much prefer if we had a dedicated |
| 23 |
mailing list for actual council work, like discussion of our agenda |
| 24 |
items. A dedicated council list would also make it easier to find |
| 25 |
previous discussions. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
So, can we please reconsider that previous council's decision? Please |
| 28 |
put this point on the agenda of the next meeting. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Ulrich |
Archives