Alan DuBoff wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Philip Brown wrote:
>> Completely bypassing ARC, or any *community* based *process* to determine
>> what the requirements are, and what the implementation looks like.
>
> Hmmm...I do not know the details on the ARC cases, but I would have
> imagined that this would have gone through ARC at some point, so I am
[Sorry for not taking more time with this...]
In talking with many involved, one disconnect in expectations I found
is that the team sees Indiana as (Admin/Install/ON + Indiana-special-sauce)
and not as (Admin/Install/ON specially modified by Indiana). That is, very
little of what they have done (mostly install/cayman stuff) has even
attempted to integrate back into the Admin, Install or ON consolidations.
This leads to a few assumptions:
The release being targeted is Solaris.Next (aka Nevada)
Indiana is not a release in the ARC vocabulary, but only
a snapshot in time of the development of Nevada as seen
thru a veneer of Indiana special sauce prototypes
At some point, those prototypes will solidify, ARC cases will
be forthcoming and the teams will gear up to develop and
integrate the features into Admin/Install/ON as needed.
Other than seeming a bit like a Jesuit Lawyer arguing the details
of orthodox doctrine, this view holds together - at least until
it meets up with the marketing and branding chaos that is trying
to position Indiana (however it is pronounced) as a release in its
own right...
Sigh.
I'd love to see the arc cases pop up for this stuff sooner rather
than later, but given their intentions, they are really doing
pretty much what we expect projects to actually do - play with
stuff until they have confidence in what they are trying to do.
-John
