From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 77066 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2017 15:06:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 76668 invoked by uid 89); 22 Sep 2017 15:06:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1587, site X-HELO: mail-io0-f180.google.com Received: from mail-io0-f180.google.com (HELO mail-io0-f180.google.com) (209.85.223.180) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 15:06:16 +0000 Received: by mail-io0-f180.google.com with SMTP id m103so3677708iod.13 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 08:06:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nb6ylp6IqFROBDijPBUBcx6mZ+IDaDqwsJRLu89nUQk=; b=dDjy43qeVRp//f3NhKCukojmHoKgvpxTEjI07pw3OdxQSjl4Knl5rue5U9L6Rl2IN5 onv2HdOfOMAb20k4/PV1qZ/OHqXy07wqzdVYj6m9cuQycLbkPsVRn4Tbg9g7i61lc9fx 9AS2P82ZFUpTYguySCrmvZOQCfXrkhdtmuulcGjhccnHYinJ5ScAx08NTehPPMYJRwn0 coHNDyd4LGrxDM7pzLP5osj4UvWzflYbCDB+5rmYyqx14Qr3BDSXKmNH42esqZZk9L5u p375TgMwDnQ09nygMGLGX0FGc1dlXerQ8xFTPAbVbF1c09qDzAF50xkqM61BwXgFG+px ay3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUhDbJF3Ns+Si6uywW2Q8L2EbcdnCLxBisucWcp/e+TEc5mGHKjB NDeNLyJM3v48/Hu2XfmgV9PByiTq X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCf8S6WHvFI9qRotGeyydq+XUjqfBNQ+n7urvIiW5L/vaTL5/ZKU4RIkJ4ZR8PosTERR+shEg== X-Received: by 10.202.95.137 with SMTP id t131mr7014847oib.194.1506092774079; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 08:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (174-16-109-244.hlrn.qwest.net. [174.16.109.244]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e8sm89916oic.7.2017.09.22.08.06.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 22 Sep 2017 08:06:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Overseers list should not be public To: Joseph Myers , Carlos O'Donell References: <660df7a2-9359-3388-172c-0b545a17e9ac@redhat.com> <20170915125600.GD112105@elastic.org> Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Florian Weimer , overseers@sourceware.org From: Martin Sebor Message-ID: <7e5f10fd-ae7f-5a3e-8550-3a7a6784d420@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 15:06:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-q3/txt/msg00105.txt.bz2 On 09/22/2017 08:39 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > >> All-in-all I consider the public nature of the list to have only >> negative consequences. > > I think it's clearly positive for it to be public. It means we don't need > to have a process for defining who from a project gets to be on overseers. > It means we can readily refer back to past discussions in the archives. > It means that when there are system problems we can refer to overseers > discussions of those problems on the mailing lists for individual > projects, and people who might not otherwise want to be on overseers can > follow the discussions there while the problems are affecting them. It > means people can check the overseers archives to see if a problem they're > encountering has already been reported. > > Note that the overseers archives are disabled from search engine indexing > via robots.txt. I also only found out about the list (or public access to it) very recently. I remember being surprised by it, mainly because of the absence of links to its archives or any mention on the Web site of it being open to subscription that I could find. Personally I don't see a problem with it being open, but if that's by design I think it should be documented like all other open lists, and probably also made searchable. Doing otherwise implies that it's not mean to be quite as public as all the others. (If there's some other reason for it not being searchable then documenting it would help dispel that perception.) Martin