Re: gnome-hackers is now closed

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Martin Baulig <martin home-of-linux org> writes:

> Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com> writes:
> 
> > I strenuously object. Consider:
> > 
> > * Nothing that has been posted on gnome-hackers since we created
> >   gnome-private has needed to be confidential.
> > 
> > * Hardly anything on gnome-hackers is confidential ever (I can't
> >   remember any truly confidential posts in a long time). I don't
> >   understand the paranoia about leaking confidential information since
> >   the whole reason we are opening up gnome-hackers is that almost
> >   nothing on it really needs to be confidential, or should be for that
> >   matter.
> 
> Well, my two weeks time-frame really isn't such a bad choice IMHO. I don't
> see any urgent need why this needs to be done immediately - gnome-hackers
> has always been closed and there actually was confidential material on it
> (which most likely isn't anymore, but it was at the time it was posted).

People are already getting in the bad habit of using gnome-private for
discussion that should not be private. I have not seen a single post
on gnome-private that couldn't have gone to the new open gnome-hackers.

> In two weeks
> 
> a) the whole gnome-hackers/gnome-private stuff will have settled down; ie.
>    people will be using gnome-private as they did with gnome-hackers before
>    without any confusion about to which list to post etc.

That's exactly the problem! People should NOT be using gnome-private
as they used gnome-hackers before. They should use the new open
gnome-hackers as they used gnome-hackers before, with the exception of
the very few things that truly need to be confidential (which is
pretty much none). We DON'T want people to start using gnome-private
just like gnome-hackers.

> b) the board will be elected
> 
>    Of cause, we can't expect the board to actually function one week after
>    its election, but we'll now who's on the board and whoever this is can
>    then make an "official" statement over this issue.

I really don't think we need an official statement to make a decision
on this one trivial issue, but I can call for a vote on the steercom
list if you insist (the Steering Committee being the interim governing
body we have for now).
 
> Basically, we can also open the list early next week (moving the archives
> takes one afternoon, but I'm getting a new machine so I most likely won't
> have any network access between Wednesday evening and Saturday morning, so
> I'll move them either tomorrow or on Sunday.
> 
> However, if we wait one more week, the board can already do some kind of
> quick conference about this and come up with a good idea what to do with
> the old archives.
>
> Since there really weren't many confidential posts during the last few
> months, the board may actually decide to open all the old archives for the
> public as well (after careful review).

I think carrying over the old archives, if at all, is a completely
separate issue. In my opinion it's less important than making sure
things are more open in the future.

 - Maciej