"Garrett D'Amore" <gdamore at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > The problems I saw have been a result of the fact that unrelated people
> > have
> > control while people with related skills are ignored.
> >
>
> No. People were involved with the decisions. Smart people listened to
> what the folks who "know" were saying. Then made a choice based on
> their understanding. In the case in point, you *had* (and still *have*)
> the ability to attend the ARC meetings and have a say. You don't get a
> vote, but you can try to influence those that do. And you can by
> diligence and participation work towards becoming a full member who
> *does* have a vote (this is something *I* am doing now -- working
> towards full PSARC membership -- 'cause guess what -- even though I'm a
> staff engineer at Sun, even I don't get a vote!)
>
> ARC can't force you to participate. If you choose not to, please don't
> blame the ARC for not making the decisions you want them to.
What is the benefit of explaining thing when later people who did not understand
the problem decide? I had several discussions in OpenSolaris mailing lists,
where it was obvious that some Sun people either did not listen or did not
understand the problem. I like to discuss a problem with people who have the
needed skills to do so.
Note that I know many knowledgeable people inside Sun, but the ARC related
discussions I had here have been influenced by some less skilled people.
If you find a way to keep the few people out who miss the needed skills, you
are welcome! This is why I make the proposal to give people benefits in ARC
related discussions if they work on a program for a longer time. My proposal
helps e.g. to score down those people who did never work on archivers if we
have
a discussion that is related to archivers.
As a result of several cases that have not been satisfying, I expect that
it now is the duty of people inside Sun to start a less disappointing case.
I like to collaborate, but I don't like to be pushed back repeatedly.
> > Sun has failed to take the code opportunities that are available from
> > people
> > outside Sun. There are a lot of code extensions an bug fixes available that
> > are
> > ignored.
> >
>
> Not every opportunity has been taken -- but that is not the same as
> saying none have been taken. And more and more are being handled every day.
>
> Again, I think you have a particular beef because /bin/tar != star, and
> because we haven't taken everything that Joerg Schilling wrote and
> shipped it as part of Solaris. If you've followed other cases, you know
> that other contributions *have* been taken, based on what priorities are
> and based on the availability and participation of 3rd parties (and also
> Sun parties) in getting all the various hurdles and process-work done.
I am sorry to see that you again try to start one of the flame wars instead of
acting.
I do a lot more than just star. I e.g. fixed and extended the SCCS sources
as well as the shell sources. If you where correct with your claim, that only
star is the problem, then there would be interest in other collaboration places.
And BTW: I did ask for a sponsor for star at the "official location" more than
2 months ago to no avail. Please do not again try start a thread that is based
on the incorrect assumption that there is colaboration from Sun before there
is a request sonsor for star.
J?rg
--
EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
