John Beck wrote:
> Stephen> The OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) observed with dismay ...
>
> Premature IMO. Let's discuss this tomorrow and hear from the principals
> first before debating any resolutions.
>
Speaking as a bystander, (I'm not an OGB member) and not even as a Sun
employee (but I am one):
What does Stephen hope to accomplish by publishing a statement such as
the draft he posted here? I can see that some people want to
immediately assume some kind of conspiracy, but I strongly suspect that
simple human error and incorrect assumptions are at fault of the failure
to follow procedure here. Yes, it *shouldn't* have happened. But it
did, and both an apology was given and corrective action to restore the
page to its original form was taken. I believe the fact that *both* of
those occurred demonstrates (to my personal satisfaction at least) that
the error was not intentional, and is unlikely to be repeated.
IMO, issuing a statement like the one Stephen proposes will only serve
to further increase tension between certain parties, and provide fodder
for Slashdot and the Linux crowd to hurt the entire community with. I
don't think it puts our community in the best possible light to throw a
spot light on this particular incident, which outsiders will use as
evidence of more discord than actually (IMO) exists.
Furthermore, if in fact the action of Sun in this matter was willful
rather than accidental, then I fail to see how a strong statement from
the OGB will do anything to prevent future occurrence; especially given
the previous significant debate on similar matters that has occurred.
IMO, the OGB's hand in all matters, including this one, should be as
light as possible, using only enough strength to resolve any disputes
that can't be resolved through other means. It should not, IMO, be the
enforcement arm of any individual or group's political will.
Let's not distract folks from the important engineering work that still
needs to be done, please.
-- Garrett
