The corporate tone.

On 7/12/07, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Chris Mahan
http://www.christophermahan.com/
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
chris.mahan at gmail.com
cell 818.943.1850
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/xwin-discuss/attachments/20070712/555d5666/attachment.html>

Reply via email to