Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 02:07:48 +0000 From: Andrew Boothman <andrew@cream.org> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: dillon@'s commit bit: I object Message-ID: <3E4071F4.7090007@cream.org> In-Reply-To: <xzpwukfzedb.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> References: <200302041944.h14JiSaX076743@grimreaper.grondar.org> <3E406467.8020500@cream.org> <xzpwukfzedb.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: >Andrew Boothman <andrew@cream.org> writes: > > >>When something happens that people perceive to have effected them >>negatively, and they are offered no explanation, the natural reaction >>is to question the legitamacy of the leadership. People need >>information in order for them to rationalise what is happening. >> >> > >Has it occurred to you that there might be no way to offer a fully >satisfactory public answer to your question without causing Matt >significant prejudice, and that core might believe very strongly that >they are doing the *right* thing by not discussing this in public? > Yes it has. I said that if -core can't describe exactly what happened then a statement giving the jist of the problem and their reasons for their actions would be good enough. It's the general secracy surrounding this that I have a problem with. Why should the users have to find out about something like this from someone who happened to examine cvs-all closely enough to realise what was happening? Even the cvs log message was constructed to give no information to a casual reader. I'm not asking for news like this to be put on the front page of the web site or sent to -announce or anything, just a succinct message to -chat or maybe -hackers to put the facts into the public domain. Thats all. Andrew. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E4071F4.7090007>