Stephen Hahn wrote:
> * Randy Fishel <randy.fishel at sun.com> [2008-05-14 21:06]:
>   
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>     
>>> Randy Fishel wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I would like to propose starting a Power Management Community.
>>>> The intention is to coalesce fragmented power management
>>>> discussion and work into a single community.
>>>>
>>>>   The proposal can be found here:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/Power_Management_Community_Group_Proposal_2008
>>>>         
>>> The OGB discussed this Monday, and had 3 questions before approving:
>>>
>>> 1) Why a community instead of a project?
>>>       
>> Primarily, because it would never be a single project.  There is a 
>> larger desire to coordinate power management work, instead of having 
>> bits (possibly conflicting bits) scattered all over the place.  And it 
>> is also difficult for developers/users to know where they should go to 
>> address their specific problems or needs.  The community could well be 
>> considered an umbrella, or meta-project, as one goal is the creation 
>> of projects to solve specific needs, but that grouping doesn't exist 
>> (yet).  
>>     
>
>   One of the problems I see with this proposal (and the Emancipation CG
>   proposal, for that matter) is that the larger scale tradeoff
>   discussions aren't going to happen in the proposed CG, but in the CGs
>   that hold the responsibilities for the main source tree for each
>   proposed change.  That is, I'm sure that Power Management participants
>   might all agree that a particular change is great for Power
>   Management, but that a person more interested in performance or
>   availability might disagree.  That discussion happens within ON.
>   
I'm not really sure that there exists a way to properly organize the 
"larger" OpenSolaris community into smaller groups that could eliminate 
this problem. I can see that any of the existing communities today could 
sponsor project work that winds up taking too myopic of an approach. 
Those projects *should* be diligent enough to solicit design and review 
feedback in the broader forums...and in case they don't...as these 
projects seek to contribute their code to the repositories owned by the 
larger CGs, it should arise though the review process (e.g. CRT), that 
due diligence hasn't been done.

The amount of power management work that could (and should) happen 
through over OS.o is too large and diverse to properly fit under any 
existing project (like Tesla)...and as a leader of that project, I would 
very much appreciate the opportunity to participate in a larger forum 
that would facilitate collaborating with the other power management 
related efforts (like storage PM, memory PM, device PM, efficient 
software development practices, etc) that can and should be working and 
participating in the open. It's pretty clear that the problems relating 
to power management in particular cut well across the system stack, so a 
forum that helps to facilitate collaboration in this area would be helpful.

-Eric

Reply via email to