On Nov 1, 2007, at 14:54, Alan Burlison wrote:
> Simon Phipps wrote:
>
>>> That's a significant community-wide power. It's a big change,
>>> without
>>> regard to the trademark legal issues.
>>
>> Only if we sit around and leave it as-is. You're speaking as if all
>> decisions are made and final. That's not so. There's a stake in the
>> ground, for sure, but we all have shovels.
>
> Assertions about nothing being final are meaningless if we have no
> plan
> or proposal to move forwards on.
>
> I'd therefore suggest that a deadline is set of 2 weeks for
> preparing a
> proposal and associated plan to be put to the OpenSolaris community at
> large. The Advocacy Community and the Trademark and Branding Project
> are to be responsible for producing the proposal, and that when it is
> complete the OGB will make a decision on whether or not requires
> ratification by the whole community by a formal vote.
>
> That's a clear, concrete proposal for how we can move forward.
Sounds a device calculated to lead to an early "no" vote to me -
reminds me of an earlier controversy.
While developing a proposal now is a positive thing to do, I suggest
waiting until closer to when we actually need a decision (which would
be the middle of next year) before we try to crystalise a veto like
that. We may find our attitudes have changed. If they haven't - well,
fair enough.
S.
We reject: kings, presidents and voting.
We believe in: rough consensus and running code.
-- David Clark, http://ietf20.isoc.org/videos/
future_ietf_92.pdf, p.19
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
