Alan Coopersmith writes:
> I think this is basically writing down what many of us believe to
> be the case, but haven't explicitly put into writing yet, leading
> to some confusion.
It's simple, but I'm not sure it's complete.
Two key issues come to mind, and I think the OGB should have some sort
of stand on these. The two issues are:
1. Appeals Path
Currently, the escalation path is from ARC to SAC (with DE or
Director), and then from SAC to CTO (with Fellow or VP).
Obviously, this is broken. DEs, Directors, Fellows, and VPs
don't exist outside of Sun, and SAC and CTO aren't part of the
OpenSolaris process.
What does it mean to appeal on "business grounds?" Whose
business? Sun's? IBM's? Someone else's?
Do we outlaw appeals? That's appealing to me, but perhaps not so
much elsewhere.
2. Contracts
ARC contracts currently require 'signatures' from managers that
'own' the technology components within Sun, and these normally
tie into bugster category/subcategory. What's the equivalent for
OpenSolaris? (Perhaps communities can sign contracts now ... but
what happens when a community dissolves?)
Can we have an OGB endorsement without repair of these fundamental
components?
> The OGB accepts as historical precedence any decisions of the Sun SAC
> that were made before June 14, 2007, including case opinions, best
> practices and policies, if, and only if, they are published openly in
> the Architecture community web pages.
So ... what happens to old decisions that still establish precedent,
but for which we simply haven't had manpower available yet to make
public? Are you walling them off so that they can _never_ be
published?
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
