Bonnie Corwin wrote:
Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 06:57:32PM -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2007, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 10:41:52AM +1200, Glynn Foster wrote:
The process requires that this be sent to one or more community groups
for sponsorship consideration...
I don't agree. Here's how I'd put it: "The almost-but-not-quite-yet OGB
blessed project instantiation draft proposal will require
that this be sent... etc."
It was approved in the public and open April 25th meeting, the minutes
of which reflect that approval and were posted as required.
Subsequent feedback is a basis for modifying the policy; it is not a
barrier to its implementation. No one read the final document and the
minutes and said "This is not the policy we approved; a new vote is
needed." We simply cannot allow cycles of feedback, however
constructive and worthwhile, to delay indefinitely the adoption and
implementation of a policy that has already been approved in
accordance with the Constitution.
In short: The policy was approved by the OGB and that approval was
communicated to the community in accordance with the Constitution. It
is in effect, and project teams are expected to follow it.
I'm sorry, but this doesn't work.
You can not expect community members to read all minutes from all OGB
meetings (which don't happen regularly) to see if decisions were made
that change policies and processes for OpenSolaris.
We have an -announce alias. We have process directions on various web
pages.
How does it make any sense to say that something approved in a meeting
and captured in minutes is now policy that everyone has to follow?
When there was no announcement, there are no new directions posted, and
Eric's repeated emails saying he was continuing to set up projects using
the old process were ignored.
I'm with Bonnie here. So far, it seems that the OGB expects all of us
to follow the discussions on ogb-discuss in order to know about
significant changes in policy. I'm also perturbed at the amount of
discussion that's apparently occurred about re-organizing communities,
yet as a leader of a community which is apparently subject to some
change here, I've had *zero* communication with the OGB on the topic.
Dave
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
