On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 02:28:53PM +0100, Alan Burlison wrote: > Well, I didn't write it, but I do disagree with it ;-)
Since there was a period of several weeks during which public comment was accepted (and incorporated!), I'm curious why you did not raise your concerns then. There were also two public, open meetings at which this was discussed and then approved; I don't recall hearing your voice during either of those. > And I also dispute that the OGB actually has a mandate to impose such a > community-wide processes without the approval of entire community, i.e. > without a community-wide vote. The OGB is not requiring much of anything here. Groups are free to decide whether to approve projects on whatever bases they like. All we're asking is that the Groups make it possible to announce their projects in a way that's useful, meaningful, and somewhat standardised. The OGB does not approve the project, the ideas it embodies, or the people doing it (though it is possible that a project could be described in a way that would contradict the Constitution; this proposal does - needlessly - include that worrisome element). We validate that it's correctly formed, then it gets created and announced. And creation isn't even performed by the OGB; it's delegated. Someday we hope it will be delegated to a robot and thus "Just Happen" when a Core Contributor fills in a web form on behalf of his or her Group. Perhaps input validation will be more acceptable to you when it's performed by a program instead of humans? This project proposal was not correctly formed, and more importantly it was not sent by a sponsoring Group as the Constitution requires. Therefore we cannot act on it. If it were, Eric would probably be off creating the new project's mailing list right now even if everyone on the OGB thought it were most ridiculous idea they'd ever heard. It seems to me that, if it wished, a Group could choose to sponsor a project without following this announcement process. The resulting project would be valid but no global announcement would be published, and any infrastructure for the project would have to be created (or otherwise obtained by) the Group. Why a Group would want to invest that effort just to spite us is beyond me, but as you say, we can't tell them what to do. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
