> What rules is he breaking? As others have noted, there has never been a > "accept all contributions" rule, in this or any other open source project.
This may be a good time to bring up the topic of "system architecture". What is (or should be) the architectural strategy for OpenSolaris? Is it "chaos, driven by anyone who feels motivated to introduce changes"? How about "ego driven by independent (and maybe competing) projects that only see the things that are in front of *their* faces"? Maybe it is "Stagnant, fixated on the way things were 5 years ago"? Myself, I thought it was "shared stewardship of a common vision and a commitment by the leaders in our community to come together and discuss architectural issues publicly in the Architecture Community". Granted, things may be in flux and disarray as Oracle lumbers in and key people leave, but I hope we aren't giving up on the concept that OpenSolaris as a whole has some long term architectural predictability that transcends the fleeting urges of any one contributor, bystander or project. What this means to me is that, while we expect projects to produce working code, they must also produce something that fits into the larger picture - or convince the other stewards that the larger picture should be changed. JBeck is simply abiding by the age-old "rule" that things don't integrate into the main tree unless and until they have received ARC approval". Since the ksh-93 gnu modernization project withdrew its ARC case because of the unresolved issues brought up during ARC review, it isn't surprising that JBeck's response is what it is... -John _______________________________________________ ogb-discuss mailing list ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss
