I'd love to see a formal audit. Like, have some team go through and figure out where are all these policies, who does what in private and why do they do it in private? I wonder if anyone in the organization has a complete view like this?
I'm not opposed to things needing to be private, but it should be consistent, and it should be explained why it can't be. I think also if there were a group starting off with an audit, then that could also be the start of a group that helps try to "solve" for some things that we wish are public, but don't have a good plan around how to do that well. On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13/04/2015 05:46, Benjamin Kerensa wrote: > >> In the cases of things that truly need to be company-confidential then >> those could still be marked but unless a strong justification could be >> given for flagging company-confidential then >> >> bugs that would ordinarily be made company-confidential would be >> mozillian-confidential. >> >> Thoughts? >> > > Overall, I think we overuse company-confidential and I would prefer that > more bugs became public. > > Can you give a few examples of the types of bugs where you believe > company-confidential is wrong and yet they can't be public? > > ~ Gijs > > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance > _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
