On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 21:57 +0100, Peter Tribble wrote:
> What I absolutely don't want is to have an implementation that has
> had zero community involvement to this point presented to us as
> "the solution" and implemented as the packaging system for Solaris
> by sheer inertia. I hope that's not going to happen, and would like to
> see clear statements as to the level of engagement the project team
> will have with the community.
This aspect concerns me as well. (I'm a member of PSARC who would
ordinarily be involved in archictectural review of this project. Since
I'm not part of the implementation team, I'm closer to "the community"
than the project team).
What's more, comments such as:
"all aspects are debatable, as
long as (a) the debate is resolved by someone ultimately writing code
and (b) the end product still resembles what we were talking about at
the beginning".
seem to me to conflict with our existing architecture review process.
Given the discussion so far, I think PSARC inception review (or perhaps
a "pre-inception", if we start doing those) for this project cannot
happen too soon.
- Bill
