On Monday 08 May 2006 06:39, Shawn Walker wrote: > I think the problem is not the criticism, but rather, the way in which it > is presented. The blog entry doesn't really qualify as "constructive > criticism" because it fails to offer "valid and well-reasoned opinions > about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative > comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one" > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_criticism). > > Personally, I think many people are more than willing to address any > criticism directed at Solaris as long as it's constructive. This particular > blog entry makes some claims in an oppositional tone without valid and > well-reasoned arguments to back them up. Not everything on the page lacks a > constructive tone, yet, it could have been done better. > > Not that I expect the person to be perfect in how they give feedback, > they're only human after all ;) > > -Shawn
Well, I think people who are Solaris programmers (at SUN) need to realise, that the criticism of Solaris is not a criticism of them - they're part of the larger organisational engine, one cog in the machine, and very little that an underling can do about these problems. The criticism is directed at the big wigs who make decisions, but tend to be AWOL when it comes time for accountability - if one doesn't wish to take responsibility for ones decision, one shouldn't become a manager. Matty _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
