Alan Burlison <Alan.Burlison at sun.com> writes: > Richard Lowe wrote: > >>> And as for commit roles, it is still completely unclear how commit >>> rights are going to be allocated - for example are these managed >>> centrally for all ON committers, or does each project that >>> contributes to ON manage its own pool of committers? In the >>> absence of any such design decisions, it is difficult to come up >>> with a database design. >> >> My understanding is that that would be the role of the community >> behind a consolidation, regardless of interests others may have in >> specific parts. Nothing else is workable. > > Do we have such a community for ON? The ON community doesn't appear > to be such a beast, it seems to be a ragbag collection of projects > that should probably live elsewhere. What would such a community look > like? Would it just have one project, the source gate that it maganed, > or some other structure?
We don't have any functionity communitee for ON, no. As I voiced at our meeting last week, I don't consider fixing ON to be our problem, I have tried, I've failed, I no longer care. We should do what is correct. I believe, as far as how this is documented in the whole constituation thing, what I described above is correct. -- Rich
