[OSGeo-Board] board.osgeo.org visibility

[Markus Neteler]

On 3/7/06, Chris Holmes <cholmes at openplans.org> wrote:
> Hrm.  It would be really nice if we could have those archives open to
> people.  You sure there's no way to hack it out?  It's gotta just be a
> tables in a database somewhere.
>
> It'd also be nice if board at board.osgeo.org were the public list, and
> board-private were the private list...

+1 from me, keeping this list private will raise confusion and
throw the concept (the private list would be board-prv or whatever).

Since Frank already took the sensitive stuff out, it should be fine
to make it public now.

Markus

> Also, I started a FAQ for questions on the Collabnet software, since I
> know I have had a few, at:
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Collabnet_FAQ.  Would you mind filling
> in answers to the two questions I don't know?  And any question that
> shows up more than once, or that we know others would like to know,
> could we just throw up on that wiki?  Hopefully that will alleviate the
> need for the telephone 'tours' of the collabnet software, which I just
> don't see as being scalable.   Though if that's the route you want to
> go, we should set up a few, I know my GeoTools guys wouldn't mind a tour
> of the functionality of the site.
>
> best regards,
>
> Chris
>
> Daniel Brookshier wrote:
> > I have an easy option. Because as far as I know, archives are not
> > easily edited for content, lets keep this list private and use it for
> > sensitive matters in the future. We can create a public list that is
> > fresh and unadulterated. We can then open up the project. Rich should
> > look at what is in the files and docs to make sure it is also good to
> > go before I throw the switch.
> >
> > Daniel Brookshier
> > Community Manager
> > 214-207-6614
> >
> > On Mar 6, 2006, at 10:06 PM, Chris Holmes wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> >>
> >>> Rich Steele wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I agree with Chris. We may want to mine the existing list to make
> >>>> sure there are not things that should be kept private.  The vote
> >>>> and tiebreak is a good example.  I also agree there should be a
> >>>> private list, the use of which should be discouraged, but which  can
> >>>> be used for sensitive topics (as well as for legal advice  that is
> >>>> only for board eyes).
> >>>
> >>> Rich / Chris,
> >>> I am happy to have the detailed voting information and our tie  breaking
> >>> deliberations stripped out of the archive for privacies sake.  I  think
> >>> someone ought to review the archive to see that anything else  sensitive
> >>> is removed as well though I can't think of anything off hand.
> >>
> >> Nothing from me.  I had actually always thought it was public
> >> visible, and the voting stuff actually raised a red flag for me,
> >> though I then realized that it was in fact private.  Ideally we  could
> >> archive that stuff in board-private, but that might be asking  too much.
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Chris Holmes
> >> The Open Planning Project
> >> thoughts at: http://cholmes.wordpress.com
> >> <cholmes.vcf>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: board-unsubscribe at board.osgeo.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: board-help at board.osgeo.org
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: board-unsubscribe at board.osgeo.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: board-help at board.osgeo.org
>
> --
> Chris Holmes
> The Open Planning Project
> thoughts at: http://cholmes.wordpress.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: board-unsubscribe at board.osgeo.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: board-help at board.osgeo.org
>
>
>