Joerg Schilling wrote:
> If we take this for serious,
> Sun would have to honor "prior art" from older OpenSolaris distributions
> or installations from the community.
> This of course also applies to "any solaris" + Blastwave.
Huh? Why should the OpenSolaris community be constrained "a
priori" simply because of anything that some non-opensolaris
team did? If we are somehow prohibited from doing things
because of what someone else, somewhere, some when and somehow
did, we might as well give up and go home. As they say, all
the good books have already been written :-)
As much as I respect the blastwave folks, and believe that what they
are doing is both desirable and useful, what they are doing is not
being done as part of the formal OpenSolaris.Org community.
Granted, some of the *people* who do blastwave (or Schillix, or Sun's
SX/SDX C-Teams, or ..., to make not-to-subtle points) *are* vocal and
valued members of the OS.o community; the difference is that they all
have chosen to maintain their own communities outside of the OS.o one
and to develop their projects on their own, with their own processes,
rules and oversight. While some of these external teams are trying to
merge into the OS.o world, others have chosen to remain apart.
This is OK, as long as you don't conflate "being associated with
OpenSolaris" with "doing things as a part of the OS.o community".
The point where the OS.o community as a whole is bound by an
architectural decision happens if and when the OS.o Architecture
Community decides to change the community's systems architecture
based on a specific proposal from someone in OS.o community. So
far, nobody has proposed that the OS.o Architecture Community
consider the wholesale adoption of blastwave.org's efforts, so
the issue is still moot.
-John
_______________________________________________
driver-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/driver-discuss
