Re: Some comments
- From: Ali Abdin <aliabdin aucegypt edu>
- To: Jim Gettys <jg pa dec com>
- Cc: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>,"Almer S. Tigelaar" <almer1 dds nl>, foundation-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Some comments
- Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 01:11:37 +0300
* Jim Gettys (jg@pa.dec.com) wrote at 01:08 on 28/07/00:
>
> Another example: a (major) vendor may be thinking about donating code
> or other technology to the project. The vendor cannot get press coverage
> if it isn't "news". This is the way the press works, for better or for
> worse, BTW.
>
> So a vendor would like to keep it secret until announcement, but also need
> comments for their press release. Right now, this means that at best there
> are approaches to individuals, which I think is a much worse situation
> than to a board (which may involved.
>
> Solution: limited confidentiality...
>
> This kind of thing has come up again and again over the history of X (there
> were large donations by various vendors, including the X11 sample server
> in the first place by Digital), and will with Gnome, and is coming up
> with Apache.
>
> So there are times confidentiality is needed, and I'm skeptical of how
> far in advance you can forsee the circumstances.
Hmm - how about some sort of stipulation that after <X> (6 months, a year,
two?) that if somebody requests the confidential material, well they have the
right to get it.
A kind of mini 'Freedom of Information' act. That way the public can know that
there is no 'conspiracy-thing' going on.
Regards,
Ali
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]