On Friday 04 May 2007 15:09, Brian Gupta wrote:

> Let's plan to vote on the final draft of this (Feel free to give a
> tentative vote):
>
> Draft: OpenSolaris open source integration policy and development
> plan
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------------------------------------
>
> I have consolidated a list of discussed goals. (And tentatively
> handed out assignments.) Please let me know if I missed something,
> and please let me know if you feel that something is out of scope.
> (Also tell me if you can't take on the assignment).
>
> Ian, you have a number of assignments. If you feel that you aren't
> the appropriate person to work on them, please let me know.
>
> Thanks,
> -Brian
>
> 1) Make Blastwave official. (ARC/Ian/Dennis)
>
>    - Have the package paths match Solaris paths.( --prefix should
> be "/") - Blastwave packages and SFW packages will use the same
> compilation flags. - Blastwave and SFW will use the same compiler
> versions. - When appropriate blastwave maintainers will also
> maintain SFW - Blastwave will continue to maintain unstable S11
> packages
>
> 2) Work to make Dennis's offer to share build machines to
> OpenSolaris SFW maintainers more widely know.`(Dennis)
>
> 3) Follow up with Sun proper for more resources for SFW. We need
> public build servers, that won't impact the Balstwave builds. We
> need more Sun bodies. We also need to put together a public
> repository that contains supported unsupported and unstable
> packages. (Ian)
>
> 4) Merge SFW, CCD, and GNU communities/projects into a single one
> called SFW. Merge leadership, mailing lists and members. This needs
> to be fast tracked (Ian)
>
> 5) Start a project to define what is "core" Solaris, what isn't but
> Sun will support and what will be community supported. (Brian and
> Sun appointee)
>
> 6) Stefan Teleman, Danek Duvall, Steve Stallion and Dennis Clarke
> will lead investigation into the next gen sfw-get packaging.
> Whether that's pkg-get compatible, apt-get compatible, or other, is
> for them to determine.
>
> 7) Sun should start giving credit to contributors. (Ian)
>
> 8) Reach out to user groups for assistance. (Brian)
>
> 9) Woo upstream developers and maintainers, to join the cause. This
> of course would be limited to smaller projects. (Once we have a
> coherent procedure and policy in place.) (Brian)
>
> Please note: I put my name in a few places. If anyone wants to grab
> that slot, or join me, that is ideal.

I am OK with all of this, with partial reservations on [5]. My 
reservations are not based on the substance of [5], but on the 
logistics of [5]. I am operating under the assumption that 
defining "core" Solaris is probably a task to be shared with Sun 
Microsystems, Inc., whereas defining "core" OpenSolaris would be a 
task to be delegated to the Community, or a Community-delegated 
Working Group, or any other such Community-based entity.

But, maybe things have recently changed dramatically and I am simply 
unaware of these changes.

Either way, I will not hold the entire draft hostage to these 
reservations, so it's a conditional "Yes" from me, pending some 
future refinements and adjustments.

--Stefan

-- 
Stefan Teleman                  'Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition'
KDE e.V.                                                -Monty Python
stefan.teleman at gmail.com

Reply via email to