From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62)
(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-22322-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>)
id 1HZWV9-0007Sm-Rd
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:16:04 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l35IEE8v018077;
Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:14:14 GMT
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l35IB4I2013863
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:11:05 GMT
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6391264F5D
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:11:04 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.441
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.441 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.812,
RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.253]
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id FEO0Z7Bnx4O8 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>;
Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:10:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2])
(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D7864F6B
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:10:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1HZWPn-0006rI-KJ
for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:10:32 +0200
Received: from 81.5.170.164 ([81.5.170.164])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:10:31 +0200
Received: from slong by 81.5.170.164 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:10:31 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
From: Steve Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for April
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:06:24 +0100
Message-ID: <ev3e1v$pgu$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <20070401092940.1B4C26441E@smtp.gentoo.org> <20070404193643.GA7174@ubik> <20070404201717.GB25883@feynman.corp.halliburton.com> <20070405092641.00676b6d@snowflake> <20070405120912.GA5025@superlupo> <20070405145119.48a89957@snowflake> <1175784457.8641.26.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <20070405160049.0d958651@snowflake> <1175786542.8641.35.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <46151DF9.40308@gentoo.org> <1175790246.8641.46.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> <20070405180003.2c157ea1@snowflake>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.5.170.164
User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4
Sender: news <news@sea.gmane.org>
X-Archives-Salt: 0ccfe9c3-8721-46fe-839f-af4e81b689e2
X-Archives-Hash: 454befae8e8dadaab9cda4709f44803c
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:24:06 -0400
> Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Well, from what I can gather, he only *thinks* he knows what was going
>> on and he's filled in the blanks himself with whatever ideas he's come
>> up with on his own. If he really does have the logs, he wouldn't be
>> spouting off at the mouth since he would know that there's nothing
>> damning in there, at all.
>
> I know that you and kingtaco threatened to remove a fellow Council
> member's access if he didn't go along with you on whatever it was you
> were discussing. If there's nothing damning in there, why would you do
> such a thing?
>
>>From what I have read so far, it wasn't a question of someone being
pressured to "go along with.. whatever it was <they> were discussing" but
rather to keep a confidence. Mr Gianelloni is right: if other parties
cannot have confidential discussions with Gentoo, it will damage the
distribution. As such, it is imo incumbent upon council members to keep
such matters (whatever they might be) private.
He has already stipulated that "all decisions we made were 100% public"
and "We do have to have all of our decisions made public, obviously."
That's transparent enough for me at least. I don't want to be privy to every
discussion, and I certainly don't want to know about say aspects of other
people's private lives which might affect their work, or even that company
X is having confidential talks with gentoo, which might come to nothing. I
just want to enjoy the software and the community, and these frankly
paranoid ramblings make the dev list much less fun.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list