[Removed psarc-ext; this isn't a case review.] Joerg Schilling writes: > It have been Sun people who claimed that the first integration wins.
Not just Sun people, but true enough. > Now if the community integrates things, it seems that Sun Solaris ignores this > and creates incompatibility. Can you cite even *one* case of this? I don't know of any. I suspect you may be thinking of star, or schilly-compare, or some other such thing. None of those are actually part of OpenSolaris, because they haven't integrated there. No such case exists. "Integrated" doesn't mean "exists in some parallel universe." It doesn't mean "went through the motions of ARC review." It means doing the hard and detailed work of design, documentation, and testing that leads ultimately to putback. > Note that the ARC is a _Sun_ vehicle but not an OpenSolaris one. I don't think that's entirely true. The OpenSolaris ARC is here: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/ It's true that the enforcement point for ARC decisions -- the C-team -- isn't open. It needs to be. It isn't part of the ARC, though, and claiming that the ARC is Sun-only because of the C-team problems seems a bit disingenuous to me. > I am sure that the ZFS team is able to derail a ARC fast track if they see > that > is would cause problems with their project. You're mistaken. The "ZFS team" isn't an ARC member ... in fact, I don't think anyone on that team is a member. Only ARC members can derail fast-tracks. Those who are not ARC members can (in the short term) raise issues and, when there are problems, gather support for their positions. In the longer term, becoming an ARC member provides more direct input, but at a not insignificant cost. The bottom line is that, even as an ARC member, you need to build consensus if you want to do anything. Treating every small problem and disagreement as an extinction level event is probably not a course that will produce good results. > If we have an open process, then the > Community members need to be able to derail a ARC fast track in case that it > causes problems with an important OSS project. We had several examples where > even this siple way to start a real discussion on problems failed. Derailing isn't rejection. It sounds as if a few people looking at the process might not understand that. In any event, in the discussions I've seen, I haven't seen any indication of failure. I've seen heated and protracted discussions between community members and a very small minority of participants, many of which were held on the wrong mailing lists and off-topic and well past the point of diminishing returns, but I haven't seen what could be called "failure" -- except a failure on the part of that minority to convince the majority of the value of their claims. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ driver-discuss mailing list driver-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/driver-discuss
