On 14/04/15 21:47, Mike Connor wrote:
> I get the sentiment, but that's just not practical in all cases.
Sure. So let's evaluate each case and see where it is practical. I'm
fairly sure it is practical in at least some of the cases under discussion.
> That said, Bugzilla is not the right level to
> > I strongly agree with the sentiment that we should strive to be more open
> > where possible and where openness will help us collectively act in the
> > interests of the mission. My belief is that's going to be a much easier
> > conversation to have once we have a workable taxonomy we can look
The vast majority of the work is evaluation of legal compliance (i.e.
financial, people, contractual, etc) to identify how restrictive we _must_
be in order to be compliant with our legal obligations. That part is not
going to be open, as many of the details can't or shouldn't be shared. Once
we'v
