Hi James,
On 06/08/10 10:35 AM, James Carlson wrote:
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
And if the case owners decline to withdraw?
We can suggest, but as I understand it, the only action we have
available to us formally as part of a fast track (besides +1'ing or
remaining silent) is to derail.
The tool may be useful, but so are a great many others. Does it have
any tie-in(s) to other parts of the system?
I'm not opposed to the project, but I do think it'd be much simpler if
we had a higher-level (say, "architectural") review of the delivery
mechanisms themselves.
In reviewing the Brownian motion of little open source packages from one
repository to another, I think we're really missing the big picture of
what the repository inclusion rules are, what things depend on what
other things, and ultimately what bits constitute "the system." With
that part sorted out, I suspect that we won't need any of these
confusing 's/SFW/contrib/' project reviews, because the answers become
quite obvious self-reviews (with zero paperwork). Without the big
picture, we're down to repeating the same discussion over and over, and
producing uneven results when some things fall through without
substantial review and others get nit-picked.
We went through this trouble once before, back when we larded up SFW
with random bits. And when (not "if" but "when") there's another
realignment of repositories, we'll have another flurry of confusing and
disjoint little projects that really have very little architectural
content in themselves.
Are you suggesting that we should make it as a project review?
Is there any reason that all of these "FOSS" projects need to be done
piecemeal?
The only reason I can think of is that not all the pieces involved are owned by
one project team member.
Asa and Seb,
Just wondering, if it is a good idea to have a PSARC meeting tomorrow to discuss
the case? If not, as suggested earlier, I can use the same time slot and my
con-call number to host an offline meeting.
Thanks,
-Suha
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-arc mailing list
[email protected]
