Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 09:43:51AM -0700, Stephen Lau wrote:
>
>> Why not open a Virtualisation Community and create an LDoms project
>> endorsed by the community?
>
> I'm not sure that LDoms is really a project, either, though. It
> doesn't seem to have the specificity or defined life span one would
> expect from a project ("Improve LDoms to support XXX" is a project,
> though).
I personally don't happen to think a project needs a defined life span.
We have the SFW project that will be ongoing. We have user groups
that ostensibly will live forever (though User Groups, I agree, are
probably an odd edge case). We have the "Enable/Enhance Solaris support
for Intel Platform" project that will undoubtedly be ongoing with
continuous sub-projects/repos for various work that will continue to happen.
> Perhaps we (the OGB) should think about ways
> for people with newly-opened source to attract a community that could
> fulfill the actual intent of the Community Group - there's definitely
> a "can't get there from here" aspect to this, and I realise that's
> frustrating.
I'd be fine if we disconnected Communities and its Core Contributors
from having governance. One of the problems I see is everyone wants to
be a "Core Contributor" or "Contributor" - but we saw pretty clearly
from the last election that not everyone is willing to participate in
things like voting. I'd much rather see people apply for the right to
vote (i.e. have people register to vote, and then vote - not unlike what
the U.S. does for its elections) so we don't have nullified elections
and votes in the future because we have too many Community Groups with
too many [Core] Contributors who don't care enough to participate in the
community at large (i.e. the OpenSolaris Community beyond just their
Community Group)
cheers,
steve
--
stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net
opensolaris // solaris kernel development
