Hi Mark,
My lack of enthusiasm for making the discussions public has nothing to do with any abuse, rudeness etc in the discussions, (which does not happen, I must say) but rather:

(a) Most of it is irrelevant to the public, and
(b) As a result of the discussions, opinions change, or people point out a flaw in some suggested solution. This type of thing does not need to be done publically, where people can 'lose face'

Perhaps a better way to understand this is by considering the following scenario. We have all been to conferences, and maybe during one of the sessions on a hot topic there is sometimes someone in the audience during question time who asks an interesting question, but the discussion goes on & on until everyone is bored with the topic. A good seminar leader will suggest that further discussion be taken 'off-line'.

And so with serious testing. Take for example the problem I reported about slowness which you indicated are 'These are pretty serious problems you are reporting'.

The general public are interested at the level of ' there is a problem with slowness when changing instruments and when using a software midi interface' (or something like that).

However the public are not interested in how we solve the problem, and all the technical discussion and detailed testing that will go on to resolve the issue. There could be a rapid interchange of e-mails (as there was on previous occasions) about the problem which will bore most people. It is this resolution process stuff that I don't like being public because:
(a) It is of little interest to the public, and
(b) Its a discovery phase, and during that phase people need the freedom to make mistakes, change their minds, go out on a limb, be a bit radical etc - and I don't think that needs to be public.

I hope you can understand my desire to be part of Composer's development, but also my reluctance and concerns in this area.

Cheers ... Clyde