On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > On 4/12/06, Keith M. Wesolowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 01:55:43PM -0500, Tao Chen wrote:
> >
> > > How's the proposed project or "CCD" related to this announcement back in
> > > Aug
> > > 2005 ?
> > > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=7545
> >
> > This project will form a collaborative effort to implement the changes
> > described by Marilyn and I in that thread, as well as to address a
> > number of the other issues raised therein.
> >
>
> Everything that I read in this thread says two things loudly :
>
> [ 1 ] Sun will create a replacement for what the Solaris Community
> has slaved to provide at Blastwave. Using Sun's vision and
I did'nt see anything about "a replacement" mentioned. Rather it looks
like healthy competition and a desire to merge both efforts. Correct me if
you think this statement is inaccurate.
> under Sun control, over time, all of the work done
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It's my impression the Keith W is doing this on his own time?
> at Blastwave will be worthless as it does not have the
> resources. Nor Sun blessing. Blastwave was formed to fill a
> need and it allowed one Solaris user to help another. That
> will be replaced by a Sun controlled process.
Again - I don't grok any hint of "replacement". But rather a desire to
merge and improve both efforts. Did I miss something?
>
> [ 2 ] The idea is proposed by a Sun person. Seconded by another Sun
Keith Wesolowski is a valued and productive member of the OpenSolaris
community. I don't care what company he works for. Do you? If so, why do
you try to differenciate one OpenSolaris community member from another by
reference to his/her employer?
> person. Not one CAB member ever says anything. No one outside
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thats the *only* reason I'm commenting here. Repeat - the *only* reason.
Why? Because, from what I read on this list there is a new project being
proposed with some overlap with an existing effort and different
community members will have different opinions on different aspects of
this proposal ... and some have made that clear in the ensuring
discussins ... sure ... but there is no dispute to resolve here and not
reason for CAB involvement.
If you feel like there is something that has happened where you think the
CAB should be involved, then I'm (and I'll assume that all the CAB members
will back this up) and we are available, as you elected representatives to
help you in any way we can.
> of Sun in the extended Community has walked forwards and made
> a single motion to support the idea. This thread is full of
> Sun employees that follow the party line and community people
> that either directly oppose it or question it.
It has everything to do with community - that is what this project is all
about. And *anyone* who says it's not about community will incure my
personal wrath. We, as the CAB/OGB, have done everything in our power to
ensure that this is all about community. If there is something that we
have not done, or that we should be doing, please air it on cab discuss.
And I'll re-double my personal efforts to address it if I'm personally
lacking and I'll ensure that it gets addressed by the CAB/OGB if they are
lacking.
> This has nothing to do with "Community". Its just business.
>
> If I am wrong here then by all means prove me wrong.
>
> Remember, I was asked last year to work with Steve Christensen on this
> and Marilyn Shoemaker and I spoke about it. The problem was that, as usual,
> Steve Christensen was to be contracted, paid above and beyond the money
> that goes to Sunfreeware every month while Blastwave was expected to simply
> slave away for free as usual. Check with Steven Harpster if I am wrong here
> and ask for the budget numbers on this project and Sunfreeware.
I can't comment on the above. It is strictly outside the CAB or the
OpenSolaris community.
> Don't drag "community" into this when the people in the Solaris community
> that have worked for years are simply being ignored and told how things will
> be. Essentially Sun INC will go into a competitive services stance with its
> own Solaris Community.
Any community member with or without the backing of his/her employer can be
competitive with any community/project on OpenSolaris. That includes IBM
Inc, Oracle Inc, Logical Approach Inc or Any Body Else Inc.
>
>
> Dennis Clarke
I think you're over-reacting. Calm down and think this through....
Regards,
Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT
OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
