Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Running GNU Savannah (frontend) locally

[beuc]

Hi,

I don't intend to continue this conversation since you ignored the
important pre-requisite issue of working on a dead project twice.

Regards,
Sylvain

On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 08:08:14AM +0300, Assaf Gordon wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On 09/03/2014 11:43 PM, address@hidden wrote:
> 
> >The fact that Savannah data is not easily parsable is a form of
> >protection, admittedly weak, but still.
> 
> I strongly disagree with the above statement. It is not a protection, neither 
> by design nor by coincidence.
> 
> >This is also a legal matter, as soon as you deal with personnal data
> >aggregation.
> 
> If you see a concrete legal problem with packaging information which is 
> already publicly accessible to non-logged-in users, please list it.
> Otherwise I see no legal issues.
> 
> >Let's not confuse data and aggregated data: checking what date you
> >coded a feature is one thing, profiling your work-hours habits by
> >aggregating your activity is another.
> 
> Not only it is not another issue, it is one and the same.
> The above sentiment is the same misconception of people sharing things online 
> and then act surprised when someone else can access it and make use of it.
> If a person submits public information to a public website (a commit to a 
> source code repository or an email to a mailing list or a non-private bug 
> report on GNU Savannah or anything similar) - it is public.
> The person has not further control over it, and should not have any 
> reasonable expectation of what can and can not be done with it.
> 
> >In addition, in the current context of NSA aggregating data, I think
> > it'd be a bad PR move to start shipping out most of our DB for the
> >sake of it.
> 
> Certain agencies illegally collecting private or public information is one 
> thing.
> Me wanting to package information which is already public is another.
> Hinting that the two are somehow similar is, in my humble opinion, spreading 
> FUD.
> 
> Also note that the goal is not to publish the public information "for the 
> sake of it",
> but to make hacking on GNU Savannah easier, and to encourage people to find 
> interesting statistics on public Free Software projects.
> 
> >Discussion with Savannah users: yes there are a lot of users, but we
> >can still initiate a discussion, e.g. on planet.gnu.org or on
> >savannah-users.  Covering enough users to get a representative
> >feedback.
> >
> 
> I have initiated a discussion. With the people most relevant: Savannah 
> Hackers.
> And in this preliminary discussion I have asked for a specific feedback:
> Which fields/tables/projects/entries in the database do you consider private, 
> or even remotely sensitive? and which are public?
> It's a technical question, and even as simple as it is - it hasn't been 
> answered.
> 
> So to make this discussion even more public with more people who are not 
> familiar with GNU Savannah, and before I actually have a good feedback on 
> what is private in the database - I feel that would be counter productive at 
> best.