| 1 |
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:59:27 -0500 |
| 2 |
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I have read this a few times now. I cannot see it being taken any other way |
| 5 |
> than written. Nothing states the problems shall remain hidden indefinitely. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Specifically mentioning BOTH security and developer relations. Meaning neither |
| 8 |
> receives special treatment over the other. Neither should be private, unless |
| 9 |
> requested to not publicize before a deadline. Implying by default it is public |
| 10 |
> including developer relations information. Developer bugs remain visible, as |
| 11 |
> are bugs filed to comrel. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Did it ever occur to you that most people around here didn't ever |
| 14 |
bother reading it that carefully? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> The fact that it mentions developer relations information implies that those |
| 17 |
> problems should be open and not hidden. That developer relations is also |
| 18 |
> handled via Bugzilla at least in part. That further links developer relations |
| 19 |
> problems to the social contract and not hiding problems there. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> If requests to publicize problems are denied. That seems like a clear breach |
| 22 |
> of the Social Contract. I would expect the Foundation to fulfill its obligation |
| 23 |
> to protect the community and enforce total adherence to the Gentoo Social |
| 24 |
> Contract. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
It sounds like you have succeeded in finding a rule that proves your |
| 27 |
point. Good job. Now, why do you presume that your application is |
| 28 |
correct? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Sure, that might have been the original intent. But that's not how |
| 31 |
comrel has been operating for a long time. It's bad if people haven't |
| 32 |
conformed to the contract but it could entirely have been an oversight. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I see this as a kind of 'dead law'. And now you're trying to abuse it |
| 35 |
to force your point of view, while entirely neglecting the other |
| 36 |
possibility -- to update it to match the long standing status quo. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
That said, I don't mind publicizing comrel bugs -- if you get all |
| 39 |
the parties to agree on it. If you file a comrel bug, you do so with |
| 40 |
presumption that it will be kept classified. It's not fair to |
| 41 |
unclassify it without getting the consent of both the accusing party |
| 42 |
and the accused. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Best regards, |
| 46 |
Michał Górny |
| 47 |
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> |
Archives