> Now I'm really confused. This last statement sounds like you're
> inventing new process. Are project teams now expected to cross-post
> things like PSARC cases and design documents to muskoka-discuss?
This doesn't sound very good to me, from an outside-of-sun perspective. I'm in
agreement with Mr. Price on this one.
> To be clear: OpenSolaris is not an OS. It is a collection of people,
> processes, and a forest of codebases; you can assemble various bits of
> OpenSolaris into any number of OS's. That's a not-insignificant
> distinction.
I'm glad somebody sees things in the same light as I do, I believe the "Open"
in "OpenSolaris" stands for a lot more than "you can download the source code
and look at it." A lot more.
> First, isn't "the muskoka project" the opposite of what we've been
> busydoing in creating projects and communities? I don't want to
> have to
> monitor and refer people posting about zones to tech-discuss or
> muskoka-discuss over to zones-discuss where all the expertise
> lives. We
> have to do that today inside of Sun and it's super annoying.
This list (OSOL-Discuss) already serves as a good
general/"I-don't-know-where-it-goes" location. I also agree that it might not
be wise to create lists which might collide with existing lists. A day or two
ago, I was in support of another general tech discussion list, but
logic/reasoning is now starting to kick in from a management perspective, and I
can forsee potential issues (some of which you mentioned). I don't have a good
solution, but it is certainly something that needs to be addressed before it
does become and issue.
<snip>
> Finally, I'll criticize myself in that last week we had a big brewhaha
> on this list about whether it was OK to be in opposition to a project.
> I'll accept the purity of the idea that anyone who wants to can
> have a
> project can have one if seconded (as in this case). So from that
> perspective, go ahead. But I object to this being called something
> really generic (like tech-discuss) or imposing new processes or
> expectations ("you should post your specs/cases/RFCs to this list")
> without a much more vigorous review.
I think the "brewhaha" wasn't so much about opposing a project, but more about
the method in which you oppose a project. Obviously not everyone is going to
agree on every proposition/idea. People should feel comfortable voicing their
opinions, both yay and nay. At the same time, voicing an opinion is not the
same thing as telling people they can/can not. That was the cause of the
"brewhaha" at least as far as I followed it. Opposition/criticism is quite a
good tool in decision making, *assuming it is constructive*. Therin lies the
key!
Cheers,
David
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
