>>>>> "RL" == Richard Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> One of the ways we've managed large projects in the past is to fiddle >> with the schedule, e.g., delaying the cutoff (and subsequent release >> date) to accomodate a "must have" project. I suppose that approach >> could be used for OpenSolaris, but we'd want some sort of >> vendor-neutral way to determine what's a "must have" project. RL> I'm not sure that could ever be vendor neutral enough to work in RL> practice. Yeah, I'm not optimistic here, either. Historically, the Solaris organization has not done well at following a strict train model for releases. I've had some hope that OpenSolaris could do better, but that assumes sufficient independence from Sun. Perhaps this argues for content-driven releases, rather than date-driven releases. mike _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
