Jim Walker wrote: > Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> At least most recently the cases that seem to have come before ARC >> for FOSS stuff > > seem to have at least a modicum of sanity behind them.) > > BTW. Going forward we plan to leverage the contrib repo and Source > Juicer more, > so FOSS is ported to contrib prior to going into a consolidation, and > than only when package interest, business case and support > requirements are evaluated > fully. We also plan to focus more on enabling technologies (ie. FOSS > that when > updated to run well on OpenSolaris enables more FOSS to be ported to > OpenSolaris). > > So, things should continue to improve on the FOSS front. Is there any notion of how much review cases will get going in to or coming from /contrib? Would it be clear to package contributors and maintainers that it is prudent that their contribution undergo some review? Does someone act in a reactionary mode and simply monitor contrib and spawn cases for contributions that warrant review due to their intimacy with the OS?
For example, if I ever got around to completing my port of OpenVPN via the juicer and /contrib, I'd expect that particular package would warrant a PSARC review. But I could just claim laziness and "submit it and forget it". I don't see any checks in place to assure sane architecture on my contribution in that process. What am I missing? Is ARC reserved only for projects that originate within Sun? For the unwashed masses that contribute via /contrib, do they care about ARC? My understanding was that it is now very easy for folks to simply find the magic configuration spec script, submit it to the juicer, and that more or less becomes an available package via /contrib. Is the notion that Sun teams might cherry pick from /contrib, tweak the spec and submit an ARC case, and then integrate more /fully/ by actually integrating source into a consolidation (shedding the skin of a spec file)?
