On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 16:40 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Transparency means asking for feedback BEFORE writing the policy. The sooner I find this not to be the case. It's certainly a judgment call, not something you can state as an absolute fact. I find it's better to provide some shape to a discussion in the form of a draft proposal, rather than just starting an entirely open-ended 'what should we do?' discussion, which tends to rapidly devolve into apathy and bikeshedding. Providing a document for discussion brings much more focus to a process. > Putting out a policy as "take it or leave it", or worse "take it, you > have to, we voted it through already" is not transparent. This is simply bad faith. I have seen absolutely no suggestion that the policy would be put out in such a way, and I can't see any basis you have to infer that. The suggestion that a draft version of the policy would be provided for feedback is not at all the same thing as what you wrote above. As long as the policy was properly adjusted (or abandoned) based on the feedback it received, what objection do you have? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
