On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 12:20:32 +0000 Julian Mehnle <julian(_at_)mehnle(_dot_)net>
wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Koen Martens wrote:
Also, 'spf-discuss' is something else than 'project staff'. For all
practical purposes, 'spf-discuss' equals 'the world' and 'project
staff' does not..
But "publicly" does qualify as "the world", does it not?
I agree with Scott in his follow-up in this thread, that we need to
be explicit about sending submissions off to spf-discuss.
So far we have the following suggestion:
"This issue [ may / may not ] be discussed publicly by project staff with
identifying information (e-mail addresses, domains, etc.) included"
- From those who think we need to be explicit about sending submissions
off
to our mailing lists, would someone please suggest an improved wording?
First, I think it may be simpler just to send them all to the RT and let us
helpers send on what needs to go to a public list.
However, I'd propose the following in place of the current text if we keep
this setup:
"This issue [ may / may not ] be discussed publicly by project volunteers
with identifying information (e-mail addresses, domains, etc.) included -
note: public messages are sent to the spf-discuss mailing list for
community review"
Scott K
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com