Re: Proposed GR: Acknowledge that the debian-private list will remain private
On 07/07/16 16:37, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I have no problem acknowledging that we haven't been able to implement
> the existing GR, but I don't see the utility of voting to remove the
> possibility of ever implementing it.
I agree 100%.
> I don't see how we could ever declassify -private without this amendment
> as the previous vote had an alternative to declassify mails before 2005
> which failed, [I should note too, that I've attempted on one or two
> occasions to go through and declassify -private, but the process
> required was far too clunky.]
I've only looked at this once but "too clunky" is being far too nice
about the process set out in https://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002 -
it requires a team to be delegated that then writes a sophisticated
automated system which does a load of indexing, natural language
parsing, dereferencing, email interfacing, semi-private publication and
more email interfacing!
I don't think it's implementable in any sensible manner. At the very
least, the requirement for the declassification to be automatic needs to
be removed because no automatic system is going to adhere to those
constraints perfectly.
It also couldn't be implemented before December 2008 because there was
nothing to implement it on until then, thanks to the amendment. So the
new proposed GR is wrong in its preamble to suggest it could have been
implemented ten years ago.
I feel an attempt should be made to reform that process to something we
might stand a chance of implementing, rather than abolish it entirely,
but I'm currently unable to second Don's excellent amendments. I beg
other DDs to consider them favourably.
Hope that explains,
--
MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op
http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer.
In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/
Reply to: