On 5/25/2010 10:20 AM, I. Szczesniak wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 7:07 PM, John Plocher<john.ploc...@gmail.com> wrote:
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.
...
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, would you mind reading the code reviews Olga has published? The
controversial /usr/gnu/bin builtin ARC case was not part of them.
The only ARC cases the putback would cover are:
PSARC/2009/414 AST versions of fold, mktemp, pathchk,& tty
PSARC/2010/078 xgrep
Both have been approved by PSARC. Code review was finished, too. I
would like to hear which other rules need to be obeyed. My company was
interested in becoming a major contributor to Opensolaris but this
scandal is going to ruin it.
(I'm making this posting as myself, and not as an employee of any
company. These views expressed below are entirely my own.)
The issue, as I understand it, is not PSARC approval. The issue is that
Oracle is exploring internally some future directions surrounding
userland, that are more closely aligned with Oracle's business priorities.
Its important for everyone here participating to realize, the
"community" does *not* have any ownership in OpenSolaris at all. It
never has, and probably never will. What it *does* have is some level
of insight into the code, and the processes, and the ability to
influence (but not control) the code and the processes leading to it.
Ben Rockwood hit the nail on the head here:
http://www.cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=1130
Folks calling for punitive action or making a stink about how Oracle
employees aren't doing this or that are probably not endearing to either
the individual Oracle employees or to the senior decision makers. The
OGB is utterly powerless in this regard as well -- all they can do is
politely request Oracle to do something; there is no fundamental
obligation. AFAICT, they don't even have the benefit of having any
official channel to Oracle leadership, now that Simon Phipps is no
longer with the company.
The decision about what integrates into ON is ultimately Oracle's, and
Oracle's alone. This was true for Sun, before the acquisition, as
well. Neither corporate entity could be expected to completely abdicate
all control over OpenSolaris to the "community"... anyone who ever
seriously believed this was sadly deluded.
Btw, the fact that there is a single decider is true for other Open
Source projects. Linus decides what can and cannot integrate into
Linux, etc.
Anyone who doesn't like this is free to start their own project,
starting with either a new code base, or forking an existing code base.
(And anyone who thinks such an effort will be easy or successful without
significant corporate endorsements is IMO also sadly deluded.)
In the meantime, can we please stop arguing about this particular issue?
-- its not constructive.
- Garrett
_______________________________________________
ogb-discuss mailing list
ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss
