[Foundation-l] Confidentiality agreement with FSF

[Dan Rosenthal]

Because saying "don't be dense" is exemplary of "good manners", right?

-Dan
On Apr 15, 2008, at 2:18 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Hoi,
> It is the Wikimedia Foundation that is the beneficiary of this whole
> process. Don't be dense. It is good manners that make a delicate  
> negotiation
> complete successful. This means that at some stage the situation is  
> as it is
> and it is best to choose between "evils".
>
> As the creation of new projects is the final step in the process  
> that is
> governed by the language committee, we have been urging for as quick a
> resolution as possible. In the final analysis it is for the  
> organisation to
> ensure that our processes are possible and implemented. I trust the
> organisation to have our best interest at heart. It saddens me that  
> the
> projects have not been created yet, but such is life.
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:04 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com 
> >
> wrote:
>
>>> If the WMF was in the business of pre-emptively publishing  
>>> information
>> on
>>> drafts of FSF licenses, I'm fairly sure they wouldn't get to see any
>> more
>>> drafts.
>>
>> If the FSF insists on confidentiality, then obviously the WMF has to
>> agree if they want to be involved. The fact that the FSF hasn't
>> required an NDA would suggest they don't insist on it, it's just a
>> preference, in which case out preference for transparency should take
>> precedence.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>> foundation-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l