> Committee: Kais Belgaied, James D Carlson, Glenn
> Skinner, Gary Winiger (opinion written by
> Darren Reed.)
As Jim already mentioned, please follow the order as
perscribed in the template.
As Jim already mentioned, please follow the order as
perscribed in the template.
"\fBCommittee:\fP" 15
.\"
.\" List here the names of the committee who participated in the decision.
.\" List the majority first, in alphabetical order. Except, place the name
.\" of the person writing the majority opinion first. List the minority
.\" second, after a "." and the word "Minority:". Again, place the name
.\" of the author of the minority opinion first, but then alphabetically.
.\" E.g.: Joe Blow, Allan Able, Charlie Carlson. Minority: George Wrong,
.\" Devils Advocate. List abstentions last.
.\"
.\" Interns should not be included in the committee list unless an intern
.\" wrote the opinion. In that situation, list the intern in parentheses
.\" after the case owner.
.\" E.g.: August Case-Owner (opinion written by Aspiring Intern)
.\"
.\" Note that <ARCDIR>/committee contains a list of committee
.\" members in a form suitable for inclusion here. The review minutes
.\" are another source for this information.
.\"
.\" Delete those members not present or not participating. Please update
.\" this opinion template when the membership changes.
.\"
> 2. Decision & Precedence Information
>
> The project is approved as specified in reference [5], but
Is reference [5] the complete specification of the project?
I would think [1-10] is more complete.
> The project may be delivered in a patch release of the ON
> consolidation.
Please follow the template. ON is not a release vehicle:
.\" The classification of the deliverable as a major, minor, micro
.\" or patch as defined in Release Taxonomy document and for what
.\" product [Solaris, a specific unbundled, ...].
.\" E.g.:
.\" The project may be delivered in a minor release of Solaris.
** Appropriate release vehicle(s). **
The interface table seems to be missing
nsmbrc(4) Committed
Please add as I noted in the commitment notes.
> |SUNWsmbfsr SUNWsmbfsu| Committed | Package names
> |
Nit put these on separate lines.
> 4.3. Kerberos and Single Sign On
I believe included in the discussion relivant to signon and
ease of use is the case depencency on pam_smb_login to
act remove the need for smbutil login.
I believe it also lead to the case dependency on pam_smb.
> 6. Advisory Information
>
> 6.1. Backport
>
> If the project team pursues a backport of this project, the
> ARC advised the project team to proceed with caution due to
^^^
We usually say Committee.
> the large number of case dependencies as outlined earlier.
I'd make this to the PAC and anyone suggesting a backport.
Something like: As noted in the 4.2, this project depends
on many tentacles spread throughout the present development
release. Backports of projects with such dependences often
introduce a higher level of instability and bugs than fully
contained projects. The committee advises the PAC and any
project teams to not undertake such a backport without
thoroughly understanding the downside consequences.
> 6.2. Case incomplete without unmount
As Jim said, this is really opinion body material.
Please move to section 4.
Please give folk a couple more days to comment on the draft,
incorporate changes and then start PSARC review.
Thankx,
Gary..
