James Carlson wrote: >> There are numerous ways to avoid that duplication of effort. I have >> proposed some; careful project leadership should also manage to do so. > > I don't think that duplication of effort is necessarily something that > should factor in here. A simple notice to the project team is more > than sufficient and (provided that they don't withdraw on their own) > should have nothing whatsoever to do with endorsement.
I have to disagree. Not only would avoiding duplication of effort here help benefit the community as a whole, but it would allow users to (theoretically) benefit more quickly than a project that was not directly influencing what it ultimately intends to change. So far, most of the points of contention don't seem to apply to the JeOS project given its implied, desired influence on the OpenSolaris 200x distribution. I don't think anyone is attempting to stop this project before it is begun, but because there is significant overlap with work being performed by existing projects, it seems problematic at best to approve parallel work that merely duplicates efforts. I would argue that even the exploratory work needed for this project should be coordinated to a certain extend to avoid the project pursuing directions that will not fit with future or expected directions of the distribution it is trying to influence. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker
