[JSR348-136] spec lead chooses what counts as "administrative", can suppress info that should be public Created: 21/Sep/11 Updated: 21/Sep/11 Resolved: 21/Sep/11
|Remaining Estimate:||Not Specified|
|Time Spent:||Not Specified|
|Original Estimate:||Not Specified|
Process Document review
line numbers: JCP-2.8-21SEP2011-Redlined.pdf
236 - strike the part on keeping "purely administrative matters" private. What constitutes an administrative matter? The decision of a spec lead to reject a Member's request for membership?
PC> I disagree. We can't always be precise, but "you'll know it when you see it. As for "the decision of a spec lead to reject a Member's request for membership" we explicitly state elsewhere that this must be public.
SS> the spec lead here determines what constitutes "adminstrative." issue of fox watching hen house. please strike
|Comment by pcurran [ 21/Sep/11 ]|
Agreed. The fox is watching the hen-house. And all of the foxes' buddies and collaborators and competitors are also watching. If there is any monkey-business (to mix our metaphor) then the truth will come out.
We're making major changes in our transparency requirements. Let's see how they work out before we start specifying things in excruciating detail, theeby rendering the Process Document even more unreadable than it already is...