On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 01:33:55PM -0700, Philip Brown wrote: > To answer the semi-unspoken question of WHY I put that in there; > it is to meet the needs of existing 'customers' of the CCD, who use it > simply because it is organized and compiled 100% by sun employees, at sun's > behest, on sun media. There's a certain "warm fuzzy" factor there, that > goes away, if additions can be put into parts of it with no sun > supervision.
I don't think Keith meant to imply that there would be no Sun supervision. Any changes made to a gate which Sun uses to create a product would be supervised by the same processes we have currently -- design review, architectural review, code review, and final RTI approval that makes sure that all the previous reviews have been done correctly. Initially, all the RTI advocates will be Sun employees, though that may (will?) open up as other people earn the trust of the community. We should be able to maintain quality and wide participation at the same time -- there's no need to sacrifice the former for the latter. Now, design and architectural review probably won't be necessary for the companion gate (they haven't been so far), but some amount of code review should be required, and an RTI certainly should be as well. At the other end of the spectrum, projects making changes to ON will need the full set. Danek
