Re: SC confidentiality

Re: SC confidentiality

[Richard Kenner]

    On the other hand, there is some value in having the opportunity to
    discuss delicate issues in confidence.  In my experience, which is
    very limited relative to a lot of the more senior SC members, there
    are no technical dicussions -- almost all discussions are about things
    like possible inappropriate behavior on the part of individuals,
    policies for dealing with copyright assignment paperwork, strategies
    for handling events that might cause confusion about GCC or the GNU
    Project, and so forth.

I agree that a free and open exchange of ideas requires
confidentiality of those discussions.  However, I think a lot of the
concerns that were expressed recently could be dealt with by having
the SC prepare a summary of the discussions leading to each
possibly-contentious decision including, when appropriate, which
people took which views if the decision was not unanimous.

Re: SC confidentiality

[Mark Mitchell]

>>>>> "Geoff" == Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org> writes:

    Geoff> Of course, prior discussions which were made in the belief
    Geoff> that they were confidential should not be disclosed, but
    Geoff> for the future I urge the SC to make its discussion open.

I have no strong feelings on this matter.  

Certainly, the SC should not be (and is not, in my opinion) a secret
cabal of puppeteers. :-)

On the other hand, there is some value in having the opportunity to
discuss delicate issues in confidence.  In my experience, which is
very limited relative to a lot of the more senior SC members, there
are no technical dicussions -- almost all discussions are about things
like possible inappropriate behavior on the part of individuals,
policies for dealing with copyright assignment paperwork, strategies
for handling events that might cause confusion about GCC or the GNU
Project, and so forth.

It's a tricky balance.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

SC confidentiality

[Geoff Keating]

> From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:06:26 -0800

> >>>>> "Geoff" == Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org> writes:
> 
>     Geoff> Are there records of such debates anywhere?  Minutes of
>     Geoff> meetings, mailing list archives, etc.?
> 
> Not to my knowledge.
> 
> I believe that in general the details of SC discussions are considered
> confidential in order to encourage frank exchanges of ideas among the
> SC members.  I could be wrong about that, but that's how I've always
> treated other people's SC postings.  If I'm right, that would make
> releasing any such archives inappropriate.

I would strongly argue that this is a bad practise.

* The job of the SC is to help the maintainers by setting policy for
  the future development of gcc.  This will be much easier for the
  maintainers if the reasons behind the policy decisions can be
  explained and the arguments considered when making those decisions
  are available.

* The members of the SC are representing various facets of the
  community of GCC users.  Unless their positions are public,
  the community can give no feedback on whether those positions
  are actually shared by the community.

* This is particularly important given the possibilty of a conflict of
  interest, since many of the SC members are also affiliated with
  various companies which have their own interests in the development
  of GCC.  A closed discussion allows allegations to be made and
  heard, even by those with obvious biases, which would be laughed at
  if the discussion were open.

Of course, prior discussions which were made in the belief that they
were confidential should not be disclosed, but for the future I urge
the SC to make its discussion open.

-- 
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>