Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Such a position would severely constrain the OGB's interactions with > other bodies, and may ultimately destroy its ability to act effectively. > > Sometimes discussions with 3rd parties *have* to be private, and if > you're not willing to have the discussions in private, then the other > parties will just refuse to talk to you. Sometimes the 3rd party here > will be Sun. Sometimes it might be other organizations, such as > security organizations (CERT), or other vendors who are contemplating > opening up to Solaris, but aren't yet ready to disclose those plans to > the world-at-large.
No.... 3rd parties do not have to be private. If they do, they can go elsewhere. OPENsolaris. OPEN source. OPEN! We can't do things otherwise, and if we do we are doomed to be a sham. CLOSEDsolaris is dead, OPENsolaris is the future. This stabs at the heart of whats wrong with the relationship between Sun and the community... we don't do closed, we don't do private. Good or bad. Right or wrong. For better or worse. OPEN. Thats what transparency is, and thats what this board must be. This is a board, I am one voice among six others and I will abid by the ruling of this body and seek compromise if I must, but it will be wrong should it come to that. benr. PS: Garrett, you're awesome, this is not aimed at you but the idea that is forwarded by many. I understand the point made by all, I really do, and if I worked at Sun I might even embrace it, but its wrong.
