Op vr, 18-11-2005 te 16:09 +1000, schreef Anthony Towns: > Okay, incorporating Manoj's proposed changes, and some other ideas: [...] > --- > In accordance with principles of openness and transparency, Debian will > seek to declassify and publish posts of historical or ongoing significance > made to the Debian Private Mailing List. > > This process will be undertaken under the following constraints: > > * The Debian Project Leader will delegate one or more volunteers > to form the "debian-private declassification team". > > * The team will automatically declassify and publish posts made to > that list that are three or more years old, with the following > exceptions: > > - the author and other individuals quoted in messages being reviewed > will be contacted, and allowed between four and eight weeks > to comment; > > - posts that reveal financial information about individuals or > organisations other than Debian, will have that information > removed; > > - requests by the author of a post for that post not to be published > will be honoured; > > - posts of no historical or other relevance, such as vacation > announcements, or posts that have no content after personal > information is removed, will not be published, unless the author > requests they be published; > > - comments by others who would be affected by the publication of > the post will also be taken into account by the declassification > team; > > - the list of posts to be declassified will be made available to > developers two weeks before publication, so that the decisions > of the team may be overruled by the developer body by General > Resolution, if necessary -- in the event such a resolution is > introduced (ie, proposed and sponsored), the declassification > and publication of messages specified by the resolution will be > deferred until the resolution has been voted on. > --- [...] > Seconds so far: > > Don Armstrong (original or Manoj's changes) > Joey Hess (original only, no comment on Manoj's changes) > Wouter Verhelst (Manoj's changes, no comment on original) > Bas Zoetekouw (Manoj's changes, no comment on original) > Daniel Ruoso (original preferred over Manoj's changes) > > Five's enough to second a proposal, but only if they all second the same > one :) Assume that fixed for my part. I hereby second this proposal, as it stands. -- .../ -/ ---/ .--./ / .--/ .-/ .../ -/ ../ -./ --./ / -.--/ ---/ ..-/ .-./ / -/ ../ --/ ./ / .--/ ../ -/ ..../ / -../ ./ -.-./ ---/ -../ ../ -./ --./ / --/ -.--/ / .../ ../ --./ -./ .-/ -/ ..-/ .-./ ./ .-.-.-/ / --/ ---/ .-./ .../ ./ / ../ .../ / ---/ ..-/ -/ -../ .-/ -/ ./ -../ / -/ ./ -.-./ ..../ -./ ---/ .-../ ---/ --./ -.--/ / .-/ -./ -.--/ .--/ .-/ -.--/ .-.-.-/ / ...-.-/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part