On Jan 16, 2008 2:00 AM, John Sonnenschein <johnsonnenschein at gmail.com> wrote: > I'd like to voice a -1 to this proposal in it's current form. > > Rationale: > 1) It excludes teams such as BeleniX and Nexenta from the community > ( as they are not built on distro constructor ).
John, it does no such thing. Please read the proposal again, you will note that it very specifically indicates that the first part is about *a distribution* that *I* want to create. It has absolutely nothing to do with the proposed Community Group itself other than a reason for my involvement. Please read the section that starts with the sentence: "As such, I would like to propose that:". You will note that it very clearly outlines the only items I have proposed for such a Community Group. Nowhere does it state anything about excluding others. > 2) perhaps Shawn would like to clarify, but it seems as if his > proposal is to avoid ARC & C-Team quality standards by forking O/N ( " > Maintains a branch of the main ON tree that integrates patches from > request-sponsor as they are posted; if they are suitable for > inclusion. Provides a way for developers (such as myself) contributing > to ON to see and test the results of their fixes quickly and > efficiently" ). The language " as they are posted " rather than "after > code review/ARC" is where this thought comes from You are misreading the proposal. The first part indicates why I want to see a distribution community: because I am interested in creating a distribution. The second part explains why we need a Distribution Community Group. Please carefully reflect on what was proposed again. Regards, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
