public? Re: Call for Votes: New OSI-Editors List

[Ernest Prabhakar]

Hi Chris,

On Nov 26, 2007, at 5:47 PM, Chris Travers wrote:
> In this case, if there are issues whose public discussion could put
> OSI in legal jeopardy or if there are needs for closed-door sessions
> to resolve easily politicized issues, those should be on a closed
> list.  But everything else should be open.  Assuming we want the OSI
> to be an open organization.

Those are good points, but as Zak pointed out the osi-editors list  
should *NOT* become a forum for substantive issues. Those should  
always be discussed on license-discuss or other lists, as appropriate.

The main focus of the osi-editors list should simply be  
"administrative" -- who's handling which tickets, how to reorganize  
the FAQ, etc.

Zak, could you perhaps start a wiki page for editor responsibilities,  
so we can start writing these down?

Thanks,
-- Ernie P.