Roy T. Fielding wrote: > In order to combine those two worlds into a working distribution > within the OpenSolaris community, we need a governance structure > that promotes independent development and local decision-making. > That is what the constitution would provide if the OGB hadn't > punted on its first task of the year, namely reorganizing the old > discussion groups into real working communities. > Except that reorganising the old communities (not discussion groups) met with serious opposition. I can't imagine how forcibly reorganising people would cause them to become "working".
Perhaps I'm being too much of a pushover - but I'd be curious to know how you would reorganise people who don't want to be reorganised, when they could just say "sod it - screw you all, I'm taking my work back inside the firewall" ? > If you don't like that, then stop pretending there is anything > open in OpenSolaris other than the end-product. Trash the > constitution and stay within the existing model of development, > wherein all the real decisions are made by Sun employees and > source code is merely thrown over the wall long after it has > been (often poorly) integrated within a consolidation. > Nobody else is going to care. > Your statements are both harmful and incorrect. You haven't made an effort to survey all the various community groups and projects and are instead basing your entire judgement of OpenSolaris on perhaps the least open community group: ON. Just as you wouldn't stand for the Apache Foundation being judged on one project's behaviour, I would ask you not to judge OpenSolaris on one project. -steve -- stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net
