Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes: > ------ from my comment 3 > Before discussing anything specific, I want to settle the abstract > question "should an OSS project have any kind of private mailing > list?". You have two options: > > 1) Give an argument why they should not. In particular, explain > why Kurt Fogel is wrong. Explain how we should discuss giving > people git access in a public, archived forum. Explain how we can > safely discuss unpatched security flaws in public. > > 2) Agree that an OSS project can, in theory, have a private > mailing list.
Unpatched security flaws affect a small circle of people when we are talking about server security, and a possibly large circle when we are talking about application security. Commit access affects a different small circle of people. If somebody uses Savannah to ask for commit access for CVS-based projects, a mail will be sent to all people with project administrator status. A similar setting would seem to apply for git access. Both scenarios involve a clearly-defined set of principally responsible people, defined by technical necessities rather than a fuzzy "people we(tm) feel good about" criterion. I am not particularly emotionally affected, merely trying to explain why others might feel more strongly about this. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
