On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 14:02 +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote: > On Fri, 2015-09-11 at 12:31 +0100, Allan Day wrote: > > Philip Withnall <phi...@tecnocode.co.uk> wrote: > > ... > > > Now that we’ve endorsed it (yay!), what are we going to do about > > > it? > > > Should we do a review of GNOME apps to make sure they all comply > > > where > > > necessary? A GNOME Goal, maybe? > > > > That's a good question. > > > > The manifesto primarily refers to cloud providers, so I'm not > > really > > sure that we can put it into effect ourselves. However, what I > > would > > like to do is work on our own privacy policy (which we could > > implement), and to hopefully use that as the basis of > > collaborations > > with the user data manifesto people in the future. > > > > Also, we can help by doing marketing and promotional work, if there > > are announcements that we can recirculate and so on. That would be > > a > > good thing to talk to the Engagement Team about. > > How about adding a small emblem in the list of account providers (in > Settings -> Online Accounts), for those cloud providers respecting > the > user data manifesto? > > And that emblem could be clickable, opening a browser to the > manifesto > website, in case users are interested?
Yes; I was also thinking of adding a link to open each provider’s privacy policy, and potentially prompting the user if they add a cloud provider whose privacy policy is particularly bad. That’s what made me wonder whether similar changes could be made in other modules — hence the suggestion for a GNOME goal. It could cover a superset of privacy concerns, rather than just User Data Manifesto compliance in modules. I’ll try and create a draft goal later. Philip
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
