John Plocher wrote: > Stephen Lau wrote: >> With a key difference being that ON went and built its own website and >> infrastructure: opensolaris.org. ON wasn't joining anyone else's community. >> >> If LDoms wants to pursue that path, then more power to it. But it's >> seeking to join our community, and as such, should play nice by how our >> community feels. > > > No disagreement here - just don't set up a us-vs-them system where > "they" have to jump thru more hoops than we ourselves do... > > My "vote" is to let them do what they desire; it takes nothing > away from ON or OS.o to have more stuff and more people in the > community; after all, OS.o has always been intended to be much > much more than simply a place to open source the ON consolidation. > > Even if we guess wrong and the LDOM folks can't make a go of things > in the long term, we still don't lose. I don't see any downside to > spinning up another CG for this effort - and I see a huge downside > to throwing arbitrary obstacles in their path. > > <cynicism> > On the other hand, if this all means we need to de-charter > ON as a community group because it isn't meeting those same > requirements... > </cynicism> > > -John (Sometimes we seem to be our own worst enemy) Plocher
As I alluded to in one of my other emails - I think we do potentially lose. What happens if next year's election rolls around, and we fail to reach the 50% required turnout? What if we fail to reach it by the 13 votes that we just gave to the LDom folks? (Not to pick on them - I'm just using them as the convenient example we're currently debating) If Community Groups and voting privileges were disconnected more, then I'd be more open to this. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development
