On 16-05-19 09:31 PM, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > > Does that mean I think LEDE is perferct? Definitely not, but I've > already seen huge improvements compared to what was happening in > openwrt, and a great deal more openness than was the case in openwrt. > > Do I think there are potentially problems, like my, and others, > impressions, that there is a fair amount of back channel (private) email > that *isn't* part of the public discussion that I thing is contrary to > the stated goal of transparency, if if the only reason is they think > it's just trivial or trying to hash things out? Then yes, I think there > is *too much* back channel mail, and that if they're *serious* about > transparency they will fix that, even if it's hard to adopt that working > style. > > You know I personally am not afraid to go on the record with my thoughts > and opinions, and I think that kind of approach is what it takes to do > transparency right, if it can be uncomfortable and keeps a history of > thing one might wish were not on the record. >
If the concert is with spamming the list perhaps something like lede-dev-talk for stuff that's for things like hashing things out and 'trivial' stuff, so that it's still on the public record (since the stated goal is transparency). Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
