Ian Murdock wrote:
On 5/15/07, Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Inside Sun, for Solaris, the product management/roadmap definition role
is played by a committee called the "Solaris PAC" (Product Approval
Committee I think, previously it was the Solaris Operating Environment
Steering Committee or SOESC). It consists of both the engineering &
marketing teams - traditionally it has 2 co-chairs - one of the directors
of Solaris engineering and one of the directors of Solaris marketing.
At some point we should create an external to Sun body to take over this
role - an OpenSolaris Steering Committee if you will. (Not the OGB,
whose role is to manage the OpenSolaris organization and communities,
but a committee to manage the operating system that OpenSolaris
produces.)
We'll also eventually need open replacements for the closed bodies that
manage the integration of the technology - the Solaris Nevada P-Team and
individual consolidation C-Teams, but there's still a lot of unanswered
questions about how to form and manage those.
Right now, since the OpenSolaris community has not taken up the mantle of
these roles, and the existing Solaris committees have not been interested
in opening up, we're letting decisions be made for the community behind
closed doors, and in many cases, not even announced to the community
until
they suddenly see code checked in.
Very, very well said.. This is *exactly* what we should be doing.
-ian
We are doing something on a scale that I don't think has been done
before. We are teasing apart a large organization -- with hundreds of
projects and people around the world -- into parts where development
will live outside but productization inside. Right now they are the
same. And we are doing this while building and shipping what is clearly
the company's most important product. This transition is huge, and
people are not appreciating its organizational complexity.
We've been building and hosting the site infrastructure and releasing
source to opensolaris.org -- 31 times by my last count -- and doing a
pile of internal and external community building activities as well as
opening projects and specifying/testing/implementing SCM systems. We
needed SCM support on the site first, which is now available with
projects using it. But, internally, engineering has to migrate to
Mercurial before we can move the gate outside. Many of the core projects
(people, process, etc) are tied to /that/ move. The tools for the move
are almost complete, and training and management planning is in process.
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/scm-migration/
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/
Now, is the infrastructure and process move behind where we'd like it to
be? Sure. But if the implication here is that nothing is happening or
that the OpenSolaris Engineering team hasn't thought of some of this,
that's wrong.
Jim
--
Jim Grisanzio, Sr. Program Manager, OpenSolaris Engineering
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
