Michael Gilbert: > So, anyway, after all of that, I would actually rather see this GR go > in the opposite direction and instead uphold the ideal of full > transparency in all works of the tech committee. I am not naive > enough to believe in this cabal idea, but enforcement of transparency > eliminates the ability for project members to even start jumping at > the perception that there is one.
I think that here on the TC list is not really the place to have this discussion. I think the TC are basically agreed that we should propose a GR along roughly these lines. The point of the conversation here on the TC list is to get the draft right, and to understand in slightly more detail why each of us support it. When it comes to the wider question - the question of principle, indeed - I think the conversation should happen on -project as part of the formal GR discussion process. That will give it a much more appropriate visibility. So for now, thanks for your comments, Michael, but I'm therefore going to defer a response. I'd encourage you to defer raising these points until then; that will save us having the same conversation twice. Thanks, Ian. (If I thought you were likely to convince TC members then it would be different of course, but we have discussed this point both in email and irc and where possible in person and that doesn't seem likely to me. See also Russ's response, which I agree with.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20484.20427.541348.714...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
