On Feb 1, 2007, at 11:24 PM, Stephen Lau wrote:
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:06:34PM -0700, Scott Tracy wrote:
1) I voiced earlier that I was disappointed at previous
projects that
didn't have source available either, and that I was going to
be a jerk
about it from now on.
I don't want that to be a gating factor to get community
involvement
and create a beachhead for a project. In fact I can see where the
start of a project is a design doc and both folks in and
outside Sun
do joint development to get a project started/completed.
Yup, I'd like to see that too.
But that's not what Honeycomb is offering. Honeycomb is offering at
best: involvement with the SDK - which is not the same as open
sourcing
Honeycomb.
No. They are offering to lead with information and the SDK. The
code is also coming.
2) The difference between Honeycomb and iSNS is that iSNS is
targeting
a consolidation (NWS) that already publishes source - so even
if the
iSNS developers never make their own source tarballs available
(which I
hope
won't happen) - we at least have a reasonable assurance that
it will
be open in the end by way of the NWS consolidation. On the
other hand,
the best I've seen Honeycomb offer is "we will look at opening up
Honeycomb". That's just not strong enough of an assurance for
me.
How would anyone outside of sun know this? And why does it matter
anyway. Refer to above, it cannot be a gate to start a project by
having source first. That's not the objective. If that's the
case,
then how will the community do joint projects or have influence on
ones in progress? The idea is to be open through-out the process.
Maybe I'm missing the point. What problem are you solving by
gating
folks without code from starting a project? Are there too many of
these that have failed or something?
So far, yes. There are projects that haven't done anything with their
project space. It bugs me.
Clearly, Honeycomb does not yet have source - that's fine.
Peter has
already initiated discussion the Appliances community, let it
live
there until they have source ready - at which point they can
request a
project to host their source.
So, let's talk through this so I can understand. How would you
work
on a design doc with the community? Walk through the normal SDF
process on something you want to develop from start to finish
in the
open.
My thought? Discuss it (the design doc) on the appropriate community
list, until it's refined enough to the point where people are jointly
ready to start developing code. When that point is reached, propose a
project, get the project created, and start hosting repositories
with the
code.
So you would pass this doc in a discussion group? And any other
material?
What stage is Honeycomb at? Does code already exist? Are they
ready to
share it? From the sounds of it: no... Peter's original project
proposal sounded more like a marketing focus group study than a joint
development project. Maybe I'm just jaded...
Yes. The code exists, it's a shipping product - it's the 5800.
cheers,
steve
--
stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net
opensolaris // solaris kernel development
Scott Tracy
Director
Sun Microsystems
303-225-7551
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
