On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 08:49:17PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld at sun.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 12:04 -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> > > > > We're talking in the context of Solaris Next, as I understand it.
> > If
> > > > > the repository software is unable to deliver the functionality,
> > then Sun
> > > > > will likely find it hard to provide no matter how much I pay them.
> > > >
> > > > I'm still confused as to why software requirements are being proposed
> > > > to ARC instead of pkg-discuss.
> > >
> > > these requirements have architectural implications for the whole of
> > > solaris. they're in scope for the ARC.
> >
> > Yes, but they should be proposed to the pkg project, and then proposed
> > by the pkg project to ARC.
> >
> > The current way is backwards to me.
>
> I just want to be clear that I am in no way attempting to impune
> anyone's character or actions here.
>
> As someone that has no relevant internal experience with Sun, and
> based on my own experiences with employers and open source projects,
> this process seems rather foreign to me.
>
> Specifically, there is no guideline or even suggestion on
> OpenSolaris.org that project contributors subscribe to arc-discuss as
> well as a project's mailing list. Nor, to my knowledge, is there
> anything that documents this "reverse-ARC" possibility for projects.
>
> I'm also concerned that having discussions outside of the primary
> mailing list for a project is going to create a gap in communication
> among OpenSolaris.org project members.
>
> In the case of ips, we are fortunate that all of the project leaders
> are likely subscribed to arc-discuss, are familiar with internal Sun
> processes, and understand the processes.
>
> This is going to be foreign territory for open source developers (such
> as myself) that are not used to processes like these.
Not for me. FreeBSD has an architecture list, where architectural
decisions are supposed to be discussed. This lets people who don't
really care about the grungy details of the network stack be spared from
subscribing to the freebsd-net mailing list and having to scan/delete
hundreds of mails they don't really understand, while the results of the
in-depth discussions are presented to the architecture list for review.
It's really very sensible.
Ceri
--
That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all.
-- Moliere
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/arc-discuss/attachments/20080417/cdc9ed64/attachment.bin>
