Shawn Walker wrote: > ..and that perhaps is the reason I fear having a distribution be > controlled by anything other than a community group.
Yes, I think we need a Distro CG to be home for all the distros. > The advocacy and > desktop communities already make decisions that have ripple effects > for our entire community; we already trust them to make many such > decisions. Keep in mind that since it was created the Advocacy CG has not made any decisions for the entire community. > Since the OGB is responsible for delegating things "such as > product development and marketing" tasks; I think that if the OGB > chose to delegate that to a particular community group; that we should > respect our constitution and allow that properly-scoped community > group to make the decisions necessary. > > I can just about guarantee that we will have very limited progress if > we try to setup a distribution community where every individual in the > OpenSolaris community gets to vote on little things such as wallpaper, > default shell, etc. Those items are best decided by a core group of > individuals that are directly involved in the work with the feedback > of the community as a *possible* *guide*. I think certain GNU/Linux > distributions have shown the deadlock that can happen when there are > too many people making the decisions. I agree with you. But we really should not feel deadlocked in our decisions. The voting membership of the OpenSolaris Community -- the Core Contributors -- is small and well defined. We may feel deadlocked at times, but that's only because we have not asserted our leadership as Core Contributors. Jim -- http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris
