[openssl-project] [openssl-committers] Changing some communication -- opinions?

[Richard Levitte]

[NOTE: since we now have openssl-project, I'm redirecting this
discussion there]

In message <b0b6966e-ee69-3b67-645f-0facdeabd7fb at openssl.org> on Fri, 22 Dec 2017 10:31:22 +0000, Matt Caswell <matt at openssl.org> said:

matt> 
matt> 
matt> On 20/12/17 11:37, Andy Polyakov wrote:
matt> >>>     It's reasonable to reserve an option that is meant to be used
matt> >>     *occasionally*, i.e. as exception. But as it was presented it looked
matt> >>     rather as rule than exception.
matt> >>     
matt> >> I think you are focusing too much on specific words; we’re not lawyers.  :)
matt> > 
matt> > I don't follow. Are rules and exceptions interchangeable in every day life?
matt> > 
matt> >> We’re trying to do what we think is the right thing – more openness, more transparency, less separation between the OMC and committers.  
matt> > 
matt> > Yes, and I challenge the suggestion to keep major and non-security
matt> > release schedules and membership questions out of committers' sight.
matt> 
matt> I agree with that. I didn't think that was the intent of what we
matt> discussed (even if the written words say something different). My
matt> expectation was that discussion of security releases would be kept
matt> private, but discussion about other releases would be on the -project list.

I agree regarding releases.  On principle, I agree re membership
questions as well, but can see reason to have exceptions, at least
these:

1. conduct.  I'd rather approach someone privately *first*, then
   discuss withing OMC how to deal, and lastly do a more open callout.

2. voting on new members.  I would like to see this happen in the
   open, buuuut we have to remember that not all of us are primarly
   associated with the project, but also have employers to deal with.
   It would be sad if the acceptance or not of new members was
   affected by external pressure, such as an employers wishes.
   Keeping that kind of dealing within the OMC doesn't take away the
   risk, but I think it will diminish it.

Item 2 is probably the strongest reason we have to have voting on
membership kept within the OMC.

Cheers,
Richard

-- 
Richard Levitte         levitte at openssl.org
OpenSSL Project         http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/