Brian Gupta wrote: >> What am I being asked to vote on ? Another mission statement ? > > 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 Nit: last two bullets could be less ambiguous. > 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) Merging the communities is an ARC-free move - just do it.
The ARCs review projects for integration, not team/project boundaries. > 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. Even with the disclaimer, I suspect this may be too specific and I suspect the project Danek pointed you at, doesn't fit this discription. Work with Danek (et.al.) on a better description. > 7) Sun should start giving credit to contributors. (Ian) Its been discussed a lot already and is really a separate issue. You've got enough here that it really should be kept separate. However, it is an issue (which may have stalled). Start with Simmon on this one. Actually, I wonder if this is Sun's to decide. I *think* its something in the CAB approved development ruleset. I suspect the CAB can revise it. (The whole idea was for Sun to put a stake in the ground, not that the stake couldn't be moved.) My suggestion here is to not differentiate between those with, or without a Sun badge. We are all OpenSolaris developers now. Besides, even though I don't personally like "signing" software (its so, so, easy to forget and offend someone), I know there are lots of folk in Sun who would love to be able to sign. > 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) Why "of course limited to smaller projects"? I simply don't understand. > Please note: I put my name in a few places. If anyone wants to grab that > slot, or join me, that is ideal. Don't be surprised if you don't have a bunch of Sun folk signing up for a couple of days. We have that small issue of getting an OK from our managers. (Not a huge thing, immediate manager almost always sufficient.) - jek3
