On 04/11/13 23:36, Majken Connor wrote: >> It can also happen the other way around, and in fact this has happened in > Reps. People will default to the most closed circle that they feel > information is appropriate for to avoid making a mistake. I am not > interested in helping Mozilla shift to being pseudo-open. I would choose > that we do things in the open or we don't do them at all.
I feel your pain here, but we've long since crossed that bridge. By choosing to make a Mobile OS (and even by choosing to do deals with search engines for Firefox), Mozilla chose to do some things which are not totally in the open, in order to promote the open web. But I think we should try and be as open as we can be - and the current choices are "employees only" or "public", so anything which can't be public is employees-only. And that's a great shame. If things which used to be public move to 'trusted only', that's a loss. If things which used to be employees-only move to 'trusted only', that's a win. I assert that there will be more of the latter than the former. > Accountability was a key value in the culture pulse, as was openness. We > shouldn't be hiring people that aren't interested in being accountable to > Mozilla's core values, we shouldn't be supporting habits or behaviours that > are counter to them. No argument from me there :-) Gerv _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
