On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm asking because of this: >> https://twitter.com/TheASF/status/472089851693891584 >> >> So, another criticism of the ASF is the fact that as committers we >> have zero say on the process because committers aren't members, and >> only members can really cause any change. I question the >> effectiveness of this given that the board for the most part hasn't >> changed in years. >> >> Furthermore, as a project of the ASF, we have no idea what's going on >> with the project that holds the copyright for our code. > > The same situation exists with Cordova's project-specific private list > from the perspective of Cordova users who are not PMC members, no?
The only thing that SHOULD be private on the lists is the selection of PMC members and security issues, and a part of me doesn't even like the latter very much when things are already public elsewhere (i.e. in BugTraq). I personally get annoyed when other things show up on private because it feels like we're being dishonest and hiding something from our users. There's also the fact that people use private lists to say things that they wouldn't dare say in public. I'll happily be rude to someone in public to their face, because to do otherwise is dishonest. > Ideally, only subjects which truly require discretion such as personnel > issues, security, trademarks and so on get discussed on private lists. > In practice, things are messy and sometimes conscious effort is required > to move conversations public, but the diversity of the ASF Membership > guards against subterfuge at the org level just as the diversity of the > Cordova PMC guards against it at the project level. > What sort of subterfuge are you referring to? It isn't related to this thread on legal, is it? http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201406.mbox/browser
