Hi everybody, Am 08.08.2016 um 16:58 schrieb Don Armstrong: > On Sun, 07 Aug 2016, Micha Lenk wrote: >> That would establishing some kind of "ex post facto" law (which by the >> way is prohibited in many constitutions for good reasons). I really >> don't want to leave the decision whether past messages will be >> affected or not up to the list masters. > > This is why the GR text requires that at minimum DDs can object via GR.
That -- and also the listmasters or another DPL delegate deciding about what/how to release publicly -- would be perfectly fine with me, but only for any mails posted after the GR is accepted. I just don't want this GR to change the rules of the past in the same go. On a related note, I would also vote against any GR to "repeal the GR of 2005 and burry the idea of systematically declassifying debian-private", as suggested by Holger Levsen. This is because despite my opposition to the current GR, I do support the rationale behind the 2005 GR: > In accordance with principles of openness and transparency, Debian > will seek to declassify and publish posts of historical or ongoing > significance made to the Debian Private Mailing List IMHO the currently proposed GR tries to solve too many issues at once. Changing the rules for future mails on -private is one goal that is hard enough to accomplish but certainly worth it. Cleaning up the backlog of declassifying the -private archive is another one, but this does not necessarily need to follow the same rules. So let's decide them separately, I would say. For this reason "further discussion" is correctly representing what I want to vote for. Best regards, Micha
