"Garrett D'Amore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Keith M Wesolowski wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:13:25PM -0500, Richard Lowe wrote: >> >> >>> I'm sure the point's being raised to you in private will be raised to >>> the ARC and the C-Team (out of the fear of precise duplication), and >>> be argued on their technical merit. >>> >> >> Duplication is certainly bad. I was thinking the team should really >> go engage with the other driver's Project Team first, but I couldn't >> find them in the project directory[0]. Did the Device Drivers Group >> create this Project and we just failed to set it up? >> > > No. The problem is that the duplication exists between closed > entities and open entities. Unfortunately, I think it will be very > difficult to get David's work past C-Team. As long as C-Team holds > the keys to the vault, it will be hard for anyone to commit anything > that someone believes is contrary to Sun's business interests.
I think we all believe what you said above to be true. Some of us believe it's also very, very wrong. Sun's Solaris product and OpenSolaris differ, there is no reason Sun couldn't deliver LSI's driver while David's existed in OpenSolaris. I've snipped the rest of your mail as I'm pretty much entirely unqualified to comment on it, but I saw nothing there that makes this response less valid. -- Rich _______________________________________________ driver-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/driver-discuss
