Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Alan DuBoff wrote:
I found it very odd and have said so repeatedly before. This was
brought
up when the previous OGB had to step in and name Garrett D'Amore,
Masayuki Murayama, and Juergen Keil as core contributors because the
Device Drivers
community had failed to do so:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=103808
I find it odd also. In fact, I think it shows a reluctance to work
with the community at large, in the way it was handled. If you ever
wonder why folks don't feel comfortable, this type of situation
doesn't give most the warm fuzzies.
So why is the Device Drivers community reluctant to work with the
community
at large?
I have a theory. That theory is that most of the people who are the
leadership of the Device Drivers Community are Sun employees in Beijing,
who do not actively participate in Open Solaris (apart from as part of
Sun), and may have little or no awareness of the freeware device drivers
that have been developed outside of Sun.
Of course, Device Drivers seems like a valid community, so the OGB
is more
likely to agree to a proposal to establish a valid set of
Contributors to
run it than to shut it down - but for now, there is no one who can
claim to
speak for the Device Drivers community or vote to take action on
it's behalf.
I would do it without asking anyone in the community also, that's the
way to do it...yeah, that's the way...
You certainly have the option to make such a proposal to the OGB without
involving the rest of the community, but we'd be more likely to accept
one that came from a group of people that appeared to represent the
community, not just you.
If the Device Drivers community is seriously dysfunctional, I'd
recommend (request!) that the OGB seek remediation. My suggestion is
likely to be:
a) get an explanation from the community leadership as to what is
happening, and a promise of effort to do better (along with appointing a
point of contact to the board... the constitution has such a position in
it, but I forgot the exact terminology. Perhaps recommend the current
leadership voluntarily supplement its ranks with other more active
participants in the community?
b) in the event that no satisfactory response to to "a" is
forthcoming, disband the current leadership, and elect new leadership.
I'm fairly confident that you'd probably find willing leadership
candidates in at least a few external candidates... including myself.
(Oh, wait, I'm not sure if I'm external or not now. But I probably
qualify in any case.)
I consider option "b" an option of last resort, rather than first
resort. Best to try "a" first, I think.
-- Garrett
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
