On Jan 8, 2008, at 3:43 AM, Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote: >> Roy Fielding also sees the same problems with the ARC process as I >> do. > > He sees a problem, but not the same problem.
I see lots of problems. > But I also think that Roy is wrong; the ARC has been given a role > in the > OpenSolaris development process which was created as a collaborative > effort between Sun and the community. As such, the ARC does plays an > important role in the design review of OpenSolaris as well as Solaris. You say the ARC has been "given a role". By whom? The development process you are referring to was the interim process that ceased to be operative the day the constitution was ratified. Let's not confuse the issue. Whether or not the ARC *should* have a role is not relevant to the problem. The problem is that they do not have such a role *right* *now* and yet the people within Sun who do the work are still following the same old process that existed before the constitution was ratified. Meanwhile, the folks on the outside, who expected communities to start making decisions in public once the constitution was ratified, are left to watch this circus wherein proposals to integrate are being delayed by middle managers within Sun without any authority and without any relevant discussion in public. Why? Because there is a complete vacuum when it comes to enforcing the constitution. We don't have votes because we don't have public lists associated with the products being developed. We don't have lists because the community structure remains the same hodge-podge of random interest forums that were created before we even had a CAB. We don't have new communities because the OGB is waiting for some kind of nirvana event in which the status quo transforms itself via enlightenment and mutual consensus. That is my problem; all other problems are merely consequences of random drift. The failure to play by the rules agreed to by all has effectively locked-out any meaningful participation by the non-Sun community. I am not saying it was intentional or even thought-out -- the fact is that people on the outside are looking in and saying WTF should I do free work for Sun when Sun doesn't even do its own work in the open? Community is based on shared work, not just shared interest. The solution is disturbingly simple. Remove all "communities" from the organization that are not currently following the rules as stated in the constitution and invite proposals for new communities based on the groups of people who are actually working on OpenSolaris projects. Require that each community fulfills the obligations of a Community Group. If anyone has a problem with that, point them to the procedure for amending the constitution. That's all. Now that we have the capacity for public version control and the infrastructure for lists, I see no reason to cling to the legacy baggage that was created out of desperation along the way. There is no conflict here with Sun's interests as a corporation. Sun decided (at the highest level) that this course of action was necessary for Sun to remain competitive in the OS space. Sun reiterated that by approving the constitution. Any decision the OGB makes for the benefit of OS.o is inherently for the benefit of Sun as well. In fact, the only way that the Sun employees on the OGB could possibly harm Sun, without exceeding the bounds of the charter, is to not make any decisions at all. ....Roy
