What part of Linda's e-mail suggested to you a private meeting? S.
On Jul 12, 2007, at 16:31, Chris Mahan wrote: > Linda, > > With all due respect, those of us who are interested in this > project and who do not work at Sun do not have access to the in- > person meetings and are only able to follow and participate in > conversations if they are held in public forums such as this > mailing list. Furthermore, while the transcripts of such meetings > or good summaries of such meeting might subsequently be made > available, the non-Sun community would just be a passive listener > rather than an active participant, unable to voice opinions and > concerns during such meetings. > > It is with great trepidation that I feel Sun is trying to assert > its command-and-control mechanisms on a supposedly open community, > and I also feel that Alan might have offended some higher-ups and > is now going to get a no-so-gentle grilling to the tune of "don't > forget who writes your paycheck." I would like to say to that that > as far as I am concerned, Alan has done a fantastic job on > OpenSolaris and deserves to be treated with respect as both a > seasoned professional in his field as well as a sorely needed > instrument of change in Sun's OpenSolaris community-building efforts. > > I understand that some things are best dealt in person, and I > especially understand how companies feel that heated arguments are > best held behind closed doors. I would just point out that in > general open-source people, geographically spread as they are, do > not have the luxury of meeting behind closed doors but rather have > developed protocols to have such discussions in the open, in > publicly available and google-searched mailing lists and forums, > and have successfully done so for many years with very good > results. The Sun employees who participate in and maintain these > public mailing lists and forums have done a tremendous job learning > from and applying these informal protocols and have, as a result, > been able to engage a wide variety of non-Sun people in discussions > relating to OpenSolaris. > > It is my wish that you would be considerate of these efforts and > results and keep the community involved rather than take a > supposedly "open" process behind corporate doors. > > Sincerely, > > Christopher Mahan > > > On 7/12/07, Fellingham Linda <Linda.Fellingham at sun.com> wrote: > Alan, > > I think this is probably a discussion that needs to happen on other > than just email exchanges. I've asked Ron B. to set up a meeting to > discuss X and OpenGL futures at a higher level. > > Thanks, > Linda > > On Jul 11, 2007, at 4:34 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > > Alan Coopersmith wrote: > >> from a > >> pure resource management perspective, it would seem the best > >> solution is > >> to remove your team's OpenGL from Solaris altogether and ship Mesa > >> on both > >> platforms. This would also give customers the same OpenGL > >> interfaces on > >> both platforms, though without hardware acceleration on SPARC, > >> much as x86 > >> users have had to suffer through for years, and would allow us to > >> ship the > >> open source OpenGL on both platforms for Indiana instead of > >> relying on your > >> closed source solution. > > > > After thinking about this some more, it may just be the best answer > > all > > around for Nevada & Indiana (but not Solaris 10) - since those will > > ship > > only with Xorg, not Xsun, and SPARC graphics has only enough > resources > > committed to Xorg to provide drivers for XVR-100, XVR-300, and > > XVR-2500, > > and of those only XVR-2500 has OpenGL hardware acceleration, > moving to > > Mesa/DRI for Nevada/Indiana will give *more* customers hardware > > acceleration > > than sticking with the current OpenGL - we'll be able to leverage > > the existing > > ATI Radeon Mesa/DRI drivers that the x86 team has ported to Solaris > > already > > and give XVR-100 & XVR-300 users hardware acceleration that they > > don't have > > today, and your team will be able to port the existing XVR-2500 > > driver (which > > was originally written for Mesa/DRI, and even with Xsun I'm told > > still uses > > DRI under the hood). It will also make it possible for IHV's like > > Tadpole > > who want to provide hardware acceleration for OpenGL on their SPARC > > platforms > > to be able to do so, which will bring hardware acceleration to > another > > batch of users who can't have it with the current SPARC OpenGL. > > > > We'll have to resolve the client library ABI issues around the > > proprietary > > Sun OpenGL ABI, but that may be a smaller problem than trying to > > shoehorn > > the old code into the new world and keep it up to date. > > > > -- > > -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com > > Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering > > > > _______________________________________________ > indiana-discuss mailing list > indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > > > > -- > Chris Mahan > http://www.christophermahan.com/ > chris_mahan at yahoo.com > chris.mahan at gmail.com > cell 818.943.1850 > _______________________________________________ > indiana-discuss mailing list > indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/xwin-discuss/attachments/20070712/ffe26613/attachment.html>
