On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > Alan Coopersmith <Alan.Coopersmith at sun.com> wrote: > >> Joerg Schilling wrote: >> > But there was no permission from the ARC to do do the change with the >> > shell.... >> >> How would you know what the ARC gave permission for in a case whose >> details are unfortunately still private? > > I am asuming that the ARC is public.
Bad assumption. Much of it is. Some of it is not. There are still closed cases that occur weekly, and that makes sense, particularly as most of those cases (by my guess), either deal with Solaris patches or Sun/Oracle layered products. I'm often delighted by the amount of concern members express regarding keeping casework as open as possible. Over the past few years, I've often heard participants express a genuine desire to perform as much of the review, and keep as much of the review materials, in the open as possible. I'd offer that generally speaking, most folks involved with this community believe in transparency and the benefits gained from inviting larger community review and participation. What has happened with this case seems somewhat exceptional. Parts of the case may, indeed, be quite "closed", and that in itself is actually a normally occurring phenomenon. Procedurally, though (and nominally, as well), there are a number of peculiarities. Of course, we're not likely to know what has really happened here, nor will we ever likely know the contents of the case, but there are clues as to the nature of the case, and we're left to simply speculate individually about the motivations, content, and actors. If you've been watching other aspects of the community (other teams and projects, especially those outside the open community), you had to suspect this sort of thing was bound to happen. Best to move along and worry about the parts we can still participate in.
