[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> What's important to recognise here is that the communities serve as
> the means to support discussion forums wherein information is exchanged.
It's more than that.
- Community core members are voting members of OpenSolaris. If we
have too many communities, we'll have too many voters and thus
nullified elections. We don't want that.
- Communities are expected to endorse and _steer_ projects in
service of a goal. Overly broad communities can't do that
effectively, and narrow ones have nothing to do.
In this case, it's pretty clear to me that the "Networking Community"
isn't doing much to steer projects towards any particular goal, and
thus this isn't an effective community.
> If we make networking any more fine grained then we must have a catch-all
> bucket for those that find our community model too troublesome or are just
> confused and want to ask an opensolaris networking question.
Create mailing lists as you see fit. I've got no problem with that,
other than that it's _not_ what this thread is about. Please start a
new thread to talk about the lists you feel are necessary.
The thread was originally about the number and scope of the
'Community' or 'Communities' (note the capital 'C' -- it's a term used
in the OpenSolaris constitution and has a specific meaning) associated
with networking.
> The problem I read is "how to keep up with everything that is going on".
That's understood, but still not the question we were trying to
address.
> I raised the topic as mailing lists because they're bound to communities.
You can have as many or as few mailing lists as you need, for whatever
purposes you want.
A single community could have twenty lists if that's what it needs.
Thus, the request really isn't on-topic here.
> just a single community and its single web page before we consider being
> multiple communities (with thus fewer to maintain it.) Erstwhile it seems
> like a fraught decision to divide it up...
Erstwhile == formerly (not "otherwise")? I'm a little confused about
what you're trying to say.
In any event, I agree with having a discussion about the mailing lists
that are required. It sounds like you're voting to have a single wide
networking Community Group.
But is it wide enough? Clearly, many networking-related things (such
as NFS and RPC) are nowhere to be found in our so-called "Networking
Community." That's quite odd, and as I mentioned before, actually
represents Sun's internal organization chart more than it does
anything technical about what we're trying to accomplish.
Thus the call to redefine the community. An answer of "no" seems
reasonable to me, but let's not veer off into other topics just yet.
> Another suggestion is to completely decouple the idea of mailing lists
> from that of communities, or if there must be some sort of relationship,
> create a mailing list for the discussion *about* the community rather than
> the topics a community is meant to be about AND continue to pursue
> discussion forums that model generally related topics of discussion.
> i.e. seperate the technical discussion from the organisational discussion
> completely.
You can already do that. The mailing lists and the communities are
not so strongly coupled.
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
