Before anyone asks I pulled off the psarc-ext alias. :) Outside of the process argument in general I think its clear we need a better set of tools. I made the same argument at arc-chairs years ago before opensoalaris, opensource, the huge set of FOSS was being packaged up, etc.
Joseph Kowalski wrote: > > Back to the SDF, there weren't supposed to be any documents that were > just for ARC review. The documents were supposed to just "fall out" > of other requirements. > > This never quite worked for a number of reasons. A large one was that > the functional spec was too high level and the design spec was > probably too detailed. > > Anyway, all that I'm pointing is out the process is *supposed* to be > as light weight as possible and part of that is to accept a wide range > of possible materials. Maybe this doesn't work anymore, but I still > think the process should be as light of a weight a process as possible > for the submitter. > > That said, the recent flurries of mail seem to indicate that "there > must be a better way".
