On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:31:15AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > The current wording, read literally, means that if I happened to run into > > Steve Langasek, say, at a social occasion, I am not permitted to mention > > network-manager and GNOME to him, because that conversation isn't public > > and that's an issue currently before the technical committee. > > I would agree that if yours here is the common interpretation of the > current wording of the Constitution, then we have a problem. (It is not > *my* reading, but that's meaningless.) I don't think that anyone would > want to inhibit private discussions to happen at all. But I do think > people would expect them to be reported ex-post.
I have no problem interpreting "are made public" to mean that a summary is send to the list. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
