[osol-discuss] Anyone seen their OpenSolaris T-Shirts?
I'm still waiting... :-( This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Express 8/2005 Released
--- Dan Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi folks. Today marks the release of Solaris Express 8/2005. As usual, you can fetch it via http://www.sun.com/solaris-express. Below is my newsletter about the release. Thanks to Alan C., Darren, Mark Nelson, and others who helped to review it. And of course to the community that built it. You can also find an HTML version on my blog at http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/dp?entry=what_s_new_in_solaris8 Thanks, -dp * glxinfo glxgears were added as a followup part of the MESA integration. * ATI Xorg drivers were updated to June 2005 version * The i810 driver was updated for i945G E7221 support. But please note that there were some problems with this integration and the Xorg i810 driver now refuses to load. Intel graphics users may need to switch back to Xsun or copy the i810_drv.so from an older build. [6301351] -- Daniel Price - Solaris Kernel Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - blogs.sun.com/dp ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org I'd like to make a suggestion for the next build of OpenSolaris or Solaris Express. Please add an Xinerama-enabled version of Xscreensaver v4.22 (http://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/changelog.html). I have a build I did for Blastwave (as well as Philip Brown) of Xscreensaver v4.22 which works nicely as my OpenGL demo tool and would like to see an updated version of Xscreensaver added. By the way, when do we all get together to build the Commuinty Companion CD?!!? ;o Ken Mays @ EarthLink, Inc. Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: GPL CDDL - incompatibitile., what does this mean? (round 3)
Richard M. Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would it be too much to kindly ask the FSF to consider amending the GPL (in light of the forthcoming GPL V3) to allow compatibility with other open source licenses which may not be GPL derivatives, but are otherwise considered ethical ? The GNU GPL is meant as a free software license. Most, but not all, open source licenses are also free software licenses. We're going to make GPL 3 compatible with a wider range of other free software licenses, but the CDDL is too far away. It has substanmtial requirements not in the GPL. To weaken the GPL to the point where it would allow the imposition of such requirements would stretch it all out of shape. If you do not mention where you see the problems, it is hard to discuss the problems. So please name the problems from your point of view. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED](work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Express 8/2005 Released
--- Dan Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi folks. Today marks the release of Solaris Express 8/2005. As usual, you can fetch it via http://www.sun.com/solaris-express. Daniel Price - Solaris Kernel Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - blogs.sun.com/dp ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Dan, I followed yor link (and off of the main Sun homepage) and pulled down SX 08/05 NVb20 - not NVb19. Was there a last minute change, and whatis the difference between NVb19 and NVb20 for Solaris Express? ~Ken Mays Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Anyone seen their OpenSolaris T-Shirts?
a few people seem to have got theirs, but I haven't got mine either if that makes you feel any better! :) This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] openboot/openfirmware screenshots
Hello, On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 23:43, Matt Sealey wrote: A silly question, does anyone have any photographs of an old SPARC or m68k workstation booting with it's cool, black-on-white firmware prompt? I've got an old 3/60 (yes, it has a 68020 CPU) with the original b/w monitor and I can take some pictures for you. Do you have any special wishes for the picture? Ihsan -- Sun Microsystems (Schweiz) AG Global Customer Services Javastrasse 2 / Hegnau CH-8604 Volketswil Phone+41 44 908 90 00 Fax +41 44 908 99 14 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web http://www.sun.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Anyone seen their OpenSolaris T-Shirts?
On 8/23/05, Peter Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm still waiting... :-( So am I, you're not alone :) -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: GPL CDDL - incompatibitile., what does this mean? (round 3)
But getting back to the main point: I don't think we're ever going to agree on SW licensing philosophy, but I don't think there's any way that OpenSolaris can be icensed under the GPL. The need and/or desire to link with 3rd party code that may or may not be open source prevents it. That is not a real obstacle. It could be licensed under a GPL-compatible license, and still permit linking with whatever else they wish, including non-free software. As an extreme example, the revised BSD license is GPL-compatible and permits linking with absolutely anything. They could use a disjunctive license GPL|CDDL if they want. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
On 8/17/05, Marilyn Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We plan to push development for the Solaris Companion out into the community, to serve as a test case for community development for other areas of Solaris. The Companion is the supplemental collection of open source software distributed with Solaris. The source code repository, the gate, will be external as will the gatekeeper, the person who manages the source base and does the builds. Why the Companion? 1. It's the simplest case we have. It's all open source. It's supplemental to Solaris and consequently not subject to reviews by internal architecture committees, a rigid bi-weekly delivery schedule, or complex dependencies. We can get it out quickly. As yet, no release date has been established. 2. Building development communities Several external communities already exist around open source for Solaris. Some discussions on opensolaris.org have suggested that these communities work more closely together. We hope the release of the Companion source base will encourage this cooperation. 3. Initial Structure Solaris management has asked Steve Christensen to be the gate keeper. Steve has maintained the sunfreeware.com site for many years. The source base will be the Companion contents for Solaris 10 minus those packages that are now included in Solaris 11 or those packages considered no longer important. Requests for upgrading existing packages and/or adding new packages will reviewed by a team of Sun engineers. Interested external people will be invited to join this team. The goal is equal representation. The review team will follow all applicable Open Solaris processes. Many implementation details remain to be determined. sorry this is opensolaris, and not the ON distrobution, sun doesn't have the right to pick the gate keeper of a community without a discussion on the subjec and possibly a vote, this seems very underhanded. I value sun choices for my OS, but I have found sun's choices for opensource software to be lacking, It is time to increase choices and keep the community growing not for sun to steam roll the community. I for one will not support a community of freeware that is created without a full discussion and a vote. James Dickens. marilyn --- Marilyn Shoemaker Solaris Program Manager This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
On 8/23/05, James Dickens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sorry this is opensolaris, and not the ON distrobution, sun doesn't have the right to pick the gate keeper of a community without a discussion on the subjec and possibly a vote, this seems very underhanded. I value sun choices for my OS, but I have found sun's choices for opensource software to be lacking, It is time to increase choices and keep the community growing not for sun to steam roll the community. I for one will not support a community of freeware that is created without a full discussion and a vote. I don't see what a companion CD that ships with a commercial version of Solaris has to do with OpenSolaris. I also think you're being rather unnecessarily negative. It seems to me that this is a business related decision, not a community one... If this was about someone who would be a gatekeeper for someone that is part of the OpenSolaris project, well that's different, but it doesn't appear to be the case. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Tech Lead
Thanks to all for the warm welcome. I'm still getting caught up on the complete contents of the program's to do list, but am always ready to hear about blocking issues, be they to do with released source, site and tools infrastructure, new systems ideas, or even random speculation. Cheers Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
Matt Ingenthron wrote: It occurs to me that the term gatekeeper is really more from Sun's teamware source control legacy and could carry a negative connotation to someone in the community who is not (or only loosely) familiar with the term. I've never worked in a consolidation with a formal gatekeeper role, but my understanding from the interaction I've had with consolidations that do, is that it's more of a release engineer or release manager role that many open and closed source products have - grunt work, not leadership. For instance, ON in Solaris has separate gatekeepers and technical leads. The gatekeepers are busy maintaining the source trees in whatever code management system is used, sysadmin'ing the source servers and build machines, etc. Choosing a gatekeeper is not about who can make the best decisions about where a project is going, but more about who can run the machines and CMS that will host the project. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
James Dickens wrote: sorry this is opensolaris, and not the ON distrobution, sun doesn't have the right to pick the gate keeper of a community without a discussion on the subjec and possibly a vote, this seems very underhanded. I value sun choices for my OS, but I have found sun's choices for opensource software to be lacking, It is time to increase choices and keep the community growing not for sun to steam roll the community. I for one will not support a community of freeware that is created without a full discussion and a vote. James Dickens. Hi James, We are no picking the gatekeeper of a community. The open source software community will still continue to have its de facto leaders (sunfreeware, blastwave, etc. etc.). Steve Christensen will be merely looking after the gate of the Sun companion CD. This is complementary to the open source software packaging community - NOT a replacement for it. This will not be the one true community of freeware. This is just a way to get Sun's existing freeware-source-base (e.g.: the companion CD) out there and into the community. I expect that Dennis, Steve, and whomever else will work on growing and developing this community in public. It is not Sun's intent to steamroll the community.. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Express 8/2005 Released
On Tue 23 Aug 2005 at 05:53AM, ken mays wrote: I followed yor link (and off of the main Sun homepage) and pulled down SX 08/05 NVb20 - not NVb19. Was there a last minute change, and whatis the difference between NVb19 and NVb20 for Solaris Express? I think it's possible that either the D/L folks or I made an error. I've asked them what is going on. My reading of the process documentation led me to believe that this SX would be snv_19. Will let you know... -dp -- Daniel Price - Solaris Kernel Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - blogs.sun.com/dp ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
Hi James, James Dickens wrote: (snip...) As long as its numbers are being padded by downloads that are on the main solaris 10 download page, it will appear to be alive. I did a quick poll in #solaris and #opensolaris, and got 2 responders that say they actually use the freeware companion disk out. Perhaps you need to take it off its life support system (being linked to on the Solaris download page) and let it stand on its own, and see if it lives or dies. I'd say the community of people that use IRC and download OpenSolaris is significantly different than the community that uses the Companion CD. That's not to say that there could be work that bring some of these communities closer. Believe it or not, there are large Solaris shops that know little to nothing about OpenSolaris. I do have customers that use the Companion CD. They may be able to use something else, but they're used to and rely upon it being there, and they'll expect it to be maintained. I think it's a good thing that Sun is being inclusive about how it'll be maintained in this brave new world of OpenSolaris. If you prefer one of the other projects, then it's entirely valid to devote your advocacy and resources to that project. Personally, I can and do so myself! Keep in mind, it may not be as cutting edge as the other freeware options, but for many people it's more than good enough. - Matt p.s.: if people are confused about whether or not they need to download the Companion, then that's something that I agree should be fixed. -- Matt Ingenthron - Technical Specialist, Web Services Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Client Solutions http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 310-242-6439 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
On 8/23/05, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matt Ingenthron wrote: It occurs to me that the term gatekeeper is really more from Sun's teamware source control legacy and could carry a negative connotation to someone in the community who is not (or only loosely) familiar with the term. I've never worked in a consolidation with a formal gatekeeper role, but my understanding from the interaction I've had with consolidations that do, is that it's more of a release engineer or release manager role that many open and closed source products have - grunt work, not leadership. For instance, ON in Solaris has separate gatekeepers and technical leads. The gatekeepers are busy maintaining the source trees in whatever code management system is used, sysadmin'ing the source servers and build machines, etc. Choosing a gatekeeper is not about who can make the best decisions about where a project is going, but more about who can run the machines and CMS that will host the project. this isn't about grunt work, its about who controls the gate, and sun endorsing this person and his project above the rest of the others. By giving Steven the nod to be the leader it gives his other project a boost as well, this seems to be a conflict of interest for him to take this on. If this was a simple project, Sun would of kept it secret and plodded along as it always has, now they have choosen to get Solairs Freeware star power in Steve C. In hopes of revitalizing its companion disk. When really it should let it die and let the existing communities seems like a perfect place to cut personel that is what Sun continues to do. Or let new Freeware communites, ones from the linux world come in, such as portaris get a foot hold and meet the needs the new Solaris users that are comming in from Linux. James Dickens uadmin.blogspot.com . -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
Hi James,
Stephen Lau wrote:
James Dickens wrote:
sorry this is opensolaris, and not the ON distrobution, sun doesn't
have the right to pick the "gate keeper" of a community without a
discussion on the subjec and possibly a vote, this seems very
underhanded. I value sun choices for my OS, but I have found sun's
choices for opensource software to be lacking, It is time to increase
choices and keep the community growing not for sun to steam roll the
community.
I for one will not support a community of freeware that is created
without a full discussion and a vote.
James Dickens.
Hi James,
We are no picking the gatekeeper of a community. The open source
software community will still continue to have its de facto leaders
(sunfreeware, blastwave, etc. etc.). Steve Christensen will be merely
looking after the gate of the Sun companion CD. This is complementary
to the open source software packaging community - NOT a replacement for
it.
It occurs to me that the term "gatekeeper" is really more from Sun's
teamware source control legacy and could carry a negative connotation
to someone in the community who is not (or only loosely) familiar with
the term.
I can't describe it as well as others on the list (so I won't try to),
but as someone not in engineering (just a lowly field guy), I see gates
as subsets of a larger work. In any OSS community, someone is looking
after the main trunk and doing the (often underappreciated) work of
coordinating all of the various changes that people want to make to the
codebase. That's how I see the teamware "gatekeeper" role. I'm sure
that's how it was meant. Take a look at Bryan Cantrill's doc here:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/documentation/getting_started_docs/developing-in-on.pdf
(it seems to have been originally written for folks inside Sun, but it
gives you a peek at what's going on behind the curtain)
Don't take it to mean there will be someone from Sun or some other
group reviewing what you want to do and slap your hand when you try to
do it. The CAB has yet to speak up on the matter (to my knowledge, I
could be wrong), but from everything I've heard to date the goal is to
have something along the lines of meritocracy
that guides the excellent work from the Apache Software Foundation.
If you have opinions {should|should not|must|must not} along the lines
of who does what in the various components that are consolidated to
make OpenSolaris (and it's derivatives), then I'm sure the CAB would
like to hear about them.
For the new work Sun is pushing outside, it makes sense to get someone
to lead that work. I don't know how they found the leader for the
Companion CD stuff, but I'm sure everyone is open to feeback for how it
should be done in the future. I'm sure it wasn't done with malice--
Sun just had to start somewhere.
This will not be "the one true community of freeware". This is just a
way to get Sun's existing freeware-source-base (e.g.: the companion CD)
out there and into the community. I expect that Dennis, Steve, and
whomever else will work on growing and developing this community in
public. It is not Sun's intent to steamroll the community..
- Matt
--
Matt Ingenthron - Technical Specialist, Web Services
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Client Solutions
http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 310-242-6439
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Obscure umem semantics
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 12:38:01PM -0700, David McDaniel (damcdani) wrote: Thanks Jonathon. Your description of the lifecycle of a buffer made perfect sense. That kind of info would help if it got into the man page. I'll work on getting the manpage updated. I'm still not sure I understand the behavior of the destructor re when and underwhat circumstances it might be used. The best I can imagine would be the case (there may be other cases, of course) when cache A has lots of free'd constructed objects and cache B has a need to allocate some additional resource... The library maint thread might try to steal some from A and calls the destructor to make them unconstructed. Are there better examples? That's pretty much the idea. Another example is when the guards debugging option is enabled; in that case, we immediately destruct the buffer when it is freed, and write 0xdeadbeef over it. When the buffer is next allocated, we verify the 0xdeadbeef pattern, overwrite it with 0xbaddcafe, call the constructor, and return it. In any case, I have a couple of followup questions. -- Regarding the reclaim function, as I understand it, the reclaim function is not required to succeed or fail in any particular way. Thus, if I wanted to I could highjack it for some simple reporting purpose like printing a trace of the fact that the pool in question had reached the point of needing more memory. Correct? It's actually (for the moment at least) more of a global notification; all the reclaim callbacks are called when umem is trying to prune things. -- Is there any straightforward way to cap the size of a cache? Unless I've missed something subtle I don't see any way to set an upper limit. Similarly I don't see a way to hint at the minimum number of buffers to initially create. No; buffers are created on demand, and there's no way to cap them. -- Lastly, is there any means to observe the state of a cache, ie to determine the current number of unconstructed/constructed/allocated buffers? There's no programmatic interface to do so, but the mdb(1) dcmds can give some of that information (allocated/total; unconstructed v.s. constructed is not called out). Cheers, - jonathan -- Jonathan Adams, Solaris Kernel Development ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Whats the current arrangement for CAB meetings? benr. PS: The Discussions link on the CAB page (http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/) points to the tools discussion, not cab-discuss. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
James Dickens wrote: this isn't about grunt work, its about who controls the gate, and sun endorsing this person and his project above the rest of the others. This sounds more like a glossary cache miss than evidence of a conspiracy. The role of a gatekeeper is very different in the FOSS and Sun worlds, primarily because Sun's ARC/development process. In the FOSS world, the gatekeeper is usually[1] one of the key maintainers, and their role is to make decisions about the evolution of the component. Many times, those decisions are in the form of allowing or disallowing certain changes/patches/commits based on the gatekeeper's own technical or ideological desires. This is part of being a gatekeeper at Sun, but with a twist. Their core responsibility is to make sure that all proposed changes have been accepted, but the gatekeeper him/herself is not the one that decides what is acceptable. Instead, it is the community, in the forms of a business or strategy group and a technical or architectural group. The gatekeeper simply checks that both types of approval have been given BEFORE the changes are allowed to be integrated. How might this play out in the OpenSolaris community? My take: The part of the community responsible for steering OpenSolaris answers the do we want it? question (i.e., the CAB sets a governance process which in turn sets the boundaries and values used to come up with the answer for any particular (proposal, community) tuple...) The ARC part of the community answers the is this the right way to architect this change? question. If the community response is yes we want it and yes it is done in the right way, then and only then would the gatekeeper allow the change to be integrated. In this definition, the gatekeeper is more of a clerk than an executive. If this was a simple project, Sun would of kept it secret and plodded along as it always has, now they have choosen to get Solairs Freeware star power in Steve C. This sounds more like a I don't like SteveC rant, which is unfortunate. -John [1] All generalities are wrong. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
Ben Rockwood wrote: I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Whats the current arrangement for CAB meetings? benr. The CAB has conference call meetings only to resolve issues that can't be worked out on list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). The charter draft was published as was the governance proposal draft. The CAB did meet at OSCON so, I'll forward those notes from Teresa to the list. Jim -- Jim Grisanzio, Community Manager, OpenSolaris http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Ben Rockwood wrote: I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Hmm. We should rectify that, even if it is to post the notes from our meetings at OSCON. Whats the current arrangement for CAB meetings? Most of our business is conducted on the CAB mailing list, away from conference calls. That's because we're all in different time zones, so arranging to be together for an hour is hard. So we decided to avoid con calls as much as possible, the intent being that the CAB mailing list archives serve as notes. That said, we *are* having a conference call tomorrow, to hammer out the remaining details of the first draft of the Charter, after which it'll be posted (on cab-discuss, IIRC) for comments and discussion by the whole community. -- Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
Because there are countless people outside Sun with expertise in building and maintaining open-source software, enabling a way for non-Sun people to contribute to the Companion CD probably should have happened _a long_ time ago. Nevertheless, I think the Companion CD concept still has merit. There are lots of customers who have a strong desire for any unsupported open-source software they might use to come from the same vendor that they purchased their platform/service contract from. With the Companion CD being developed out in the open, maybe now it can become a subset of software which is derived from a larger ports project. Eric ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
Rich Teer wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Ben Rockwood wrote: I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Hmm. We should rectify that, even if it is to post the notes from our meetings at OSCON. I'm happy to post Teresa's notes. Jim ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
Jim Grisanzio wrote: Rich Teer wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Ben Rockwood wrote: I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Hmm. We should rectify that, even if it is to post the notes from our meetings at OSCON. I'm happy to post Teresa's notes. Thanks Jim and Rich. BTW, just re-checked the proposal which states: There will be weekly con-calls pre-launch and at least monthly post launch. OSCon takes care of August, so I guess we'll have a CAB call/meeting in Sept then. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
Ben Rockwood wrote: Jim Grisanzio wrote: Rich Teer wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Ben Rockwood wrote: I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Hmm. We should rectify that, even if it is to post the notes from our meetings at OSCON. I'm happy to post Teresa's notes. Thanks Jim and Rich. BTW, just re-checked the proposal which states: There will be weekly con-calls pre-launch and at least monthly post launch. OSCon takes care of August, so I guess we'll have a CAB call/meeting in Sept then. benr. The governance draft needs to be updated in that section to reflect my original note on this thread unless the CAB decides to change it back. Jim -- Jim Grisanzio, Community Manager, OpenSolaris http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
PS: The Discussions link on the CAB page (http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/) points to the tools discussion, not cab-discuss. This is fixed. Thanks for the heads up. Derek ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org -- Derek Cicero Program Manager Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Anyone seen their OpenSolaris T-Shirts?
How were those to US destinations shipped (USPS, UPS, whatever)? Knowing that might help some of us know what to watch for. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
| Nevertheless, I think the Companion CD concept still has merit. There | are lots of customers who have a strong desire for any unsupported | open-source software they might use to come from the same vendor that | they purchased their platform/service contract from. I'd word this slightly differently: there is merit in being given the choice during OS install of do you want to install freeware as well?. Where exactly this freeware comes from, especially for non-Sun distributions, may be up for debate. Of course many customers want to know this is blessed in some way by the vendor, but another overlapping set of people just want to get it easily installed. Hugh. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Solaris Companion community development
James Dickens wrote: this isn't about grunt work, its about who controls the gate, and sun endorsing this person and his project above the rest of the others. This sounds more like a glossary cache miss than evidence of a conspiracy. The role of a gatekeeper is very different in the FOSS and Sun worlds, primarily because Sun's ARC/development process. In the FOSS world, the gatekeeper is usually[1] one of the key maintainers, and their role is to make decisions about the evolution of the component. Many times, those decisions are in the form of allowing or disallowing certain changes/patches/commits based on the gatekeeper's own technical or ideological desires. This is part of being a gatekeeper at Sun, but with a twist. Their core responsibility is to make sure that all proposed changes have been accepted, but the gatekeeper him/herself is not the one that decides what is acceptable. Instead, it is the community, in the forms of a business or strategy group and a technical or architectural group. The gatekeeper simply checks that both types of approval have been given BEFORE the changes are allowed to be integrated. How might this play out in the OpenSolaris community? My take: The part of the community responsible for steering ing OpenSolaris answers the do we want it? question (i.e., the CAB sets ets a governance process which in turn sets the boundaries and values used sed to come up with the answer for any particular (proposal, community) ty) tuple...) The ARC part of the community answers the is this his the right way to architect this change? question. If the community response is yes we want it and and yes it is done in the right way, then and only then would the the gatekeeper allow the change to be integrated. In this definition, the gatekeeper is more of a clerk than an executive. Confusing. If your definitions are correct shouldn't the handoff of the project go to the executive? ---Bob This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Companion community development
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Hugh McIntyre wrote: | Nevertheless, I think the Companion CD concept still has merit. There | are lots of customers who have a strong desire for any unsupported | open-source software they might use to come from the same vendor that | they purchased their platform/service contract from. I'd word this slightly differently: there is merit in being given the choice during OS install of do you want to install freeware as well?. Where exactly this freeware comes from, especially for non-Sun distributions, may be up for debate. +1. It'd be great for the OS install to present choices of where to get freeware from. (My point was that there will probably always be some people who will want the vendor-blessed freeware.) Of course many customers want to know this is blessed in some way by the vendor, but another overlapping set of people just want to get it easily installed. Agree. Eric ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
