[csw-maintainers] ITP: opencsw-policy

[Peter FELECAN]

Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> writes:

> Excerpts from Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski's message of Fri Dec 31 15:32:08 -0500 2010:
>
>> mouth when talking in private.  Another issue: having public
>> archives of policy discussions might be important for newcomers, who
>> might want to read discussions behind policy decisions.  Otherwise
>> you might see the same questions raised over and over again, or you
>> would have to document all of them.
>
> Agreed.  +1 for public discussion of policy.  There is no need to keep
> this behind closed doors.  If the 'public' cares enough about a
> specific issue being discussed, it might even encourage audience
> participation, which wouldn't be bad, I don't think...we often wonder
> what the users are doing, so if we have a chance to hear from them
> about things we're planning that will affect them, this is a good
> thing!

The policies has the maintainers as the sole public. If somebody is
interested by these discussion s/he can subscribe. The user is a
fallacious public brought up only when cornered.

Why do you think that Debian, among others, has private discussion lists?

>> I'd say that creating the new mailing list should happen when we
>> notice concrete problems with existing discussions and agree that a
>> private list would solve them.
>
> Also agreed.  If the policy specific volume on maintainers@ becomes a
> significant proportion, we could split it out at a later time.

I'm worried by the noise that can drown directly or indirectly policy
discussion as happened so many time in the past.

-- 
Peter