Cyril Plisko wrote: > On 7/7/07, Neil Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Cyril, >> >> I wrote this case and implemented the project. My problem was >> that I didn't know what policy (if any) Sun has about publishing >> ARC cases, and a mail log with a gazillion email addresses. >> >> I did receive an answer to this this in the form: >> >> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/arc-faq/arc-publish-historical-checklist/ >> >> >> >> Never having done this it seems somewhat burdensome, and will take >> some time. > > Neil, > > I am glad the message finally got through. > > It seems to me that the URL above refers to the publishing > materials of *historical* cases. Do you think the case in hand > should be considered historical ?
Yes, this was what I was asked to do. Looking more closely it doesn't look too bad. I'll start this process. > > Anyway, many ZFS related cases were openly reviewed from > the moment zero of their life, why this one was an exception ? There's no good reason. Certainly the ideas had been kicked around on the alias, but I agree there was no specific proposal and call for discussion. > >> >> Sorry, for the slow response and lack of feedback. Are there >> any particular questions you have about separate intent logs >> that I can answer before I embark on the process? > > Well, that only question I have now is what is it all about ? > It is hard to ask question without access to case materials, > right ? So I've attached the accepted proposal. There was (as expected) not much discussion of this case as it was considered an obvious extension. The actual psarc case materials when opened will not have much more info than this. Hope this helps: Neil. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
