> That is, I contented that a Project may start life as Sun Confidential > (or Nexenta, or whatever), and ultimately plan on opening up later. > There can be various reasons, none of which are inherently evil, for the > project to start life as such.
I understand that a closed project may want to become open. I think that's great. Closed projects that want to become open shouldn't get special status. If the project wants to be open, let it do its reviews in the open. It doesn't seem acceptable to have this any other way. It doesn't make sense to me that a project can say, "We want to be open, but we don't want our reviews public." This is saying you're open without actually being open. In fact, I don't believe that OpenSolaris should be endorsing projects that aren't open. Maybe I've misunderstood something fundamental? Why should some projects get to have it both ways? -j
