On 5/31/07, Keith M Wesolowski <keith.wesolowski at sun.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 09:22:20PM -0400, Ian Murdock wrote: > > > So, it seems the crux of the matter is the following decision: > > > > 1. OpenSolaris should remain a source base only. Sun > > and others use that source base to build (potentially incompatible) > > operating systems based on the OpenSolaris code base. > > > > 2. OpenSolaris should be an operating system in its own right. > > Multiple implementations (distros) can still exist, but they must > > remain compatible with each other to use the name OpenSolaris. > > > > Some people here think #1. Other people here think #2. So, it appears > > we're at a decision point. How exactly does the "community decide"? Just > > wondering, because that isn't entirely clear to me. And if there's no clear > > answer to that, then something's very wrong, because in the absence > > of clear decision making processes, we're just going to argue > > endlessly. If you want more details on why this thread > > worries me, see http://www.linuxformat.co.uk/murdockint.html). > > Since we're currently at (1), the question is really "If someone > wanted to change the policy to (2), how would that decision be made?" > Because although it shouldn't be so, this decision must be considered > differently depending on the direction in which the policy is being > shifted. > > There are two components to what you suggest (I'll write here as if > you're the champion of option (2), since that seems to be the case). > First, having the OpenSolaris community as a whole endorse a > particular distribution as that reference, or canonical distribution. > Pick a different term if you prefer, but that's what it sounds like > you're proposing. That decision would be made in the form of a policy > by the OGB. In effect, that policy would state that distribution XXX > managed by the YYY Community Group is the reference OpenSolaris > distribution. The process for making decisions like that is loosely > spelled out in the Constitution - in effect, the OGB is expected to > listen to its constituency and employ a combination of free-form > discussion here and parliamentary procedure in formal meetings to > reach policy decisions. > > Second, and more difficult to cope with, is the restriction on the use > of the OpenSolaris name. As you know, Sun owns and controls that > name. So whatever the OGB or anyone else might prefer as a policy, > Sun and no one else can dictate how the name can be used. I believe > at present it's a fairly permissive regime. A change could be > requested by you, by the OGB (the formal liaison with Sun), or by > someone acting solely on behalf of Sun. The actual decision to > implement this change cannot be made openly or by us; a decision to > request it could be made, and would follow a process similar to that I > described above.
That's a very long answer to a very simple question. To summarize, "the community decides" means majority vote of the OGB membership? > > P.S. - The decision really isn't as stark as that just yet. All we're > > asking for is a project where we can *explore* #2.. > > It seems to me (speaking personally now) that you'd be best positioned > to start exploring a reference distribution by first exploring the > mechanics of making a distribution. That is, by writing some code, > and taking your ideas, your prototype, and the problems you've > encountered along the way to one or more of the Community Groups for > help and advice, and by actually diving in and starting to understand > what OpenSolaris is and how it works at a technical level. Obviously, > I'm familiar with your background and respect what you've > accomplished. But I do think it's fair to say that this is a rather > different environment, one with its own technical challenges. > > If the Project Instantiation process were working here (instead of > being worked around), it would have put you in touch with Groups whose > members have worked on some of these problems in the past and are > familiar with the technologies involved. One of them would agree to > sponsor your project and send a simple statement of what you hope to > accomplish to us to be announced. You'd then go off and write some > code to start implementing your vision, knowing who to talk with when > you get stuck. As you start to have something to demonstrate, > something to discuss, interest in your work will grow, along with your > project team. As that happens, you can begin to drive consensus > around how things ought to work. That's around the time I'd think it > reasonable to start contemplating the whole question of whether your > thing should be a reference distribution or not. So, we should go do the initial work inside Sun before proceeding? -ian -- Ian Murdock 650-331-9324 http://ianmurdock.com/ "Don't look back--something might be gaining on you." --Satchel Paige
