Re: Keeping PMC communications public when possible -- is pmcs@ responsible?

2018-09-14 Thread sebb
On 14 September 2018 at 12:21, Rich Bowen wrote: > You are definitely not wrong. Two observations I'd make: > > 1) We should avoid sending anything to the pmc lists that isn't actually > private, as you say. And the pmc members are all (probably? Should be?) > also on the dev list. > > 2) if one

Re: Keeping PMC communications public when possible -- is pmcs@ responsible?

2018-09-14 Thread Rich Bowen
You are definitely not wrong. Two observations I'd make: 1) We should avoid sending anything to the pmc lists that isn't actually private, as you say. And the pmc members are all (probably? Should be?) also on the dev list. 2) if one uses an alias that forwards to multiple other lists, always

Re: Keeping PMC communications public when possible -- is pmcs@ responsible?

2018-09-14 Thread Julian Foad
TL;DR: Is the "pmcs@" alias the root of the problem? Need "pmcs-private@" and "pmcs-public@"? Rich Bowen wrote: > I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you've never sent an email > message to all of the Apache dev lists. > [It] *always* results in at least one angry response, and usually