Hi cos, good point --- and yes Of course - I was Just voicing my general thoughts on the subject.
In general I think sharing It amongst commiters at least probably isn't a particularly dangerous thing to do. > On Mar 11, 2015, at 2:51 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jay, > > as you know PMC is a legally bound entity. As such we might be responsible for > certain things happening in the community. Let's not rush any steps unless > they are discussed and approved by PMC. > > Cos > >> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:43AM, jay vyas wrote: >> im open to sharing the password with anyone in the community who is a >> trusted and responsible bigtop contributor, such as yourself mark. I >> really have very little concern that the privilige will be abused. >> >>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Mark Grover <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> I am glad we are having a conversation about this, this is an important >>> subject. >>> >>> Seems like there is some disagreement in how we want to deal with social >>> media - CTR, guidelines, etc.. Why don't we have a vote to decide? That's >>> what voting is there for anyways, right?:-) >>> >>> Also sounds like the password will be shared within the PMC so perhaps, a >>> PMC vote makes more sense? I am not a member of the PMC so I won't start or >>> cast a vote but will share my opinion as a member of the community. I >>> really see no downside to having guidelines. In fact, that way, we will >>> have something we can refer to both within the project and outside the >>> project and it makes us more transparent as a community. It will be an >>> iterative process but I think it will be a great first step. And, since >>> Bruno seems to have some interest in that direction (correct me if I am >>> wrong, Bruno), why not we request Bruno to put together some concrete set >>> of guidelines that folks can vote on? >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Bruno Mahé <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 03/10/2015 11:41 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Bruno Mahé <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> While I do agree a formal process to bless tweets would be way too >>>> heavy, >>>>>>> sharing the account password would not address the same issues that a >>>>>>> proper >>>>>>> guideline would. >>>>>>> Without guidelines, we could end up with self-contradicting tweets, >>> or >>>>>>> too >>>>>>> much deletion. All of it with little or no accountability or >>>> explanation >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> we would end up re-playing the same threads about what can be tweeted >>>>>>> from >>>>>>> our PMC's account. >>>>>> >>>>>> Same hypothetical can be applied to commits. It doesn't seem to happen >>>>>> in practice. Hence I'm not worried about it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Roman. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Commits are audit-able. >>>> >>>> So are tweets if you want them to. >>>> >>>>> Also commits are labeled as commited from the commiter rather than the >>>> PMC >>>> >>>> That's a good point, although in practice I don't think it'll make much >>>> difference. >>>> >>>>> And last, what I prefer about commits is they don't deal with opinions >>> :) >>>> >>>> ;-) >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Roman. >> >> >> >> -- >> jay vyas
