Shawn Walker wrote: > On 02/11/2007, Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersmith at sun.com> wrote: >> If this is indeed solely about Indiana, I'd suggest a better course of >> action is to: >> >> 1) Inform all three of Indiana's sponsoring communities about the release >> plans requirement of the constitution. >> >> 2) Make sure this is covered in the community guidelines we're drafting >> and hurry up finishing and disseminating those. >> >> 3) Remove the Release Timeline diagram and information from the front >> page of http://opensolaris.org/ until either Project Indiana complies >> with the constitutional requirements or a constitutional amendment to >> change those requirements is put forth and adopted. > > The interesting thing about all of this is that the OGB and community > has no control over the trademark. So exactly what rules have they > violated?
This was in response to Roy's compliant, which did not mention the trademark at all - if you go back and read it, his complaint was that Project Indiana (and by extension it's sponsoring communities) have violated the requirements of the OpenSolaris constitution regarding community votes being required to adopt a release schedule, such as the one presented in the timeline diagram on http://opensolaris.org/ (listing production releases in 3/2008 and 9/2008). As I go back to the constitution to find the exact sections to quote, I find I cannot find Roy's definition of a release, nor a requirement to vote on a release schedule, just a listing of release plans as one example of things a Community Group could hold votes on. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
