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.

Reply via email to