> the opensolaris prefix is certainly redundant +1
> This email structure implies that we no longer wish to distinguish the sub groups of ARC, > ie PSARC, LSARC, WSARC, FWARC. Within the openSOLARIS community, I expect that to be more-or-less true. Except for some of the desktop stuff, the communities that LSARC focuses on are only marginally related to ON - in many cases the only connection is that most of them run on Solaris. WSARC has ties that bind them to the Java world - J2SE, J2EE/Honeydew, the JCP process, Java.Net, etc - I would not expect those communities to pick up shop and migrate over to opensolaris.org. If you ask yourself why we have multiple ARCS, you will find that it has more to do with alignment with communities than it does with anything else. If there is a lot of work being done in <the foo area>, it only makes sense for the experts in <foo> to get together and manage the architectural evolution of <foo>. Even though we are biased against "product focused" ARCS (an oxymoron considering the systems focus of the ARC process) as well as "project focused" rubber-stamp ARCs, the synergy between the intent of the ARC and community self-governance makes this a good model. This implies (to me, at least) that this effort is not aimed at inventing a generic "openARC.org". Nor am I blindly advocating that "Sun's existing ARCs" are the answer for all of Sun's external/open-source efforts. Instead, I am promoting a locally grown architecture focused sub-community that meets the needs of the larger OpenSolaris effort. I am happy to work on other projects that will meet the needs of the other communities that might be served by OpenLSARC and/or OpenWSARC, but that (IMHO) is not this effort, even though those future efforts will certainly be based on what we learn and do here. -John
