Hi folks, I've been hesitant to jump into this discussion (and the previous few on the roles of the OGB), but I'd like to share my thoughts. It strikes me that a couple of analogies to governance of countries, specifically the United States, might give some perspective.
First, OpenSolaris seems to be intended to be a confederation, with independent Community Groups (states) governing themselves and a weak OGB (federal government). I think much of the confusion and many of the complaints about the OGB stem from a lack of understanding that this is the way things are supposed to be. Many of us (myself included) seem to assume at first that the OGB is supposed to be a strong federal government, and is somehow derelict if it doesn't actively take on that role. On the contrary, it seems that the OBG is deliberately taking a "states' rights" view, and trying as hard as possible to stay out of the way. This isn't an invalid way to run things, but seems to be contrary to what many of us are expecting and assuming. Second, in the United States federal government there are three branches. In theory (and very much in theory only, but let's not get into that :-), the legislative branch writes the laws, the executive branch enforces the laws, and the judicial branch interprets the laws. As the "federal government" of opensolaris, the OBG seems to feel that its role is primarily judicial. That is, it doesn't seem to be writing new rules and regulations, nor actively ensuring the existing ones are followed. Instead, it seems to see itself as an adjudicating body, which will resolve disputes and answer questions that are brought to it. Again, this isn't a bad approach. It's just that many of us seem to expect the OGB to be more of an executive branch, actively broadcasting the rules and regulations and ensuring they're followed. OGB members, do you agree or disagree with this characterization? Thanks, Nick Darren J Moffat wrote: > Jim Grisanzio wrote: >> If you have an approved but not yet created project that no one has sent >> to the OGB as per the project creation process then I'd argue that you >> don't have an approved project. The process hasn't been completed. Why >> is it so difficult for someone in that CG to monitor the list for >> project discussions and votes, walk people through the process, and keep >> track of stuff? What am I missing? I do this with Advocacy specifically >> because we have a lot people in user groups around the world whose first >> language is not English, and so some of this is confusing. So, I walk >> everyone through it from beginning to end. > > Because it all takes time and someone has to learn and remember that all > this needs to be done. In my opinion the OGB has done a very poor job > letting the communities know what is expected of them in areas like > this. It appears to me that the OGB assumes that community leaders > actively "pull" information, stuff this important (even if it is in the > approved constitution) really should be "pushed" (just once is fine). > > Now that I know we need to do this I'm working to rectify things for the > security community. > -- Nicholas Solter, Solaris Cluster Development http://blogs.sun.com/nsolter
