> Let's stick with hardware that is as real as real gets to avoid the > possibility of any package being released that has not ever been > actually tested on the real thing.
OK > There must be standards compliance and of course I agree with the > enforcement of these standards. That is a non-issue. The > specification of those stanards would be a community effort and we > need input from many places and *that* process will be non-trivial. We > may even need a new mail list. At the very least we can always use > the mailist server at Blastwave at users at lists.blastwave.org if need > be. See : > > https://lists.blastwave.org/mailman/listinfo/users No, not a separate list. The GNU, SFW, CCD communities need to merge, and this discussion needs to happen there. Everyone needs to be involved. > What is your influence in that regard ? Just as much as any interested third party, who has a strong desire to make this work, and the tenacity to not let it drop. (Annoying I know, but isn't that what Open-Source is all about?) > > Perhaps. ;) But first we *all* need to come to a common vision. > > OKay ... let's write a mission statement and then go from there perhaps. No point in writing a mission statement if everyone isn't on board. > Necessity dictates that I do both every day. > > > You efforts will be needed to set standards, > > represent your community, and coodinate blastwave's efforts within the > > OpenSolaris ecosystem. You have a good team in place, delegate. Only > > step in when their is no-one else that can do what needs to be done. > > (Realize that alot of decision making will be made jointly with the > > OpenSolaris community.) > > One does not delegate to a community volunteer. One meets halfway > and then possibly further also. This is where being a worker bee is a > necessity. No one in the "team" gets paid to do this and there is no > throat to choke. Well, aren't you a community "volunteer" as well? As far as I know, you don't work for Sun, do you? > > One thing I think Sun desparately needs to address, is crediting third > > party contributors within Solaris itself. When it was just Sun doing > > the development, it was "works for hire", so no credit needed to be > > given. Now with unpaid volunteers joining the mix, Sun has to give > > credit where credit is due. (Maybe in the man pages? And.or the docs.) > > That is a Sun Microsystems Inc. issue and not an OpenSolaris.org issue. Hmm, I don't agree. If things are fed into Express with credits, Sun will have to make an active decision to remove them. Doing so has the potential to upset the volunteer community, and would probably go a long way to preventing growth of that selfsame community. > > > As for community software, in order for the massive pile of CSW > > > software to be integrated into Solaris or OpenSolaris we need to close > > > ranks a bit and stop bickering with each other. > > > > Can we agree, that Blastwave needs to be a bit more disciplined and > > patient in their approach towards getting packages into OpenSolaris? > > OKay. I think that patience has been demonstrated and can continue. I meant patience with the speed of the OpenSolaris proposal process, and patience with team members that are making sure that the stable legacy of Solaris is upheld. > That again means we need to separate the Sun Microsystems Inc. > concerns and the OpenSolaris community concerns. There needs to be a > clear understanding that I am a "community" guy and always have been. > The hard fact is that Sun Microsystems Inc, her customers and VARs and > ISVs have benefitted greatly from the work done. I would like to think the goals of OpenSolaris and Sun are in allignment no? (In addition to Solaris being the most advanced operating system on the planet, but to make it the most useful) Am I mistaken? "Community guy"? Why would anyone think otherwise? Please explain what you mean by this. I am confused. > > At this point I think everyone needs to commit to work together. If > > you are reading this, you should respond, either commit, or say that > > they will not commit. No abstains. Yeah or Nay. > > YAY +1 (Can I do this to my own proposal? I guess it's like putting a buck in your tip jar to get the money flowing.) > > If we can quickly reach agreement, I will draft a project proposal for > > review. We are desperately short of time. Informed decisions need to > > be made quickly. (Oxymoron I know.) ;) > > YAY to that also. +1
