[Reply-to points at [EMAIL PROTECTED] where I suggest we focus discussion]
On Oct 31, 2007, at 20:16, Alan Burlison wrote: > What will be the point of having a vote on something that is a fait > accompli? That's a very negative way to frame things, in my view. We are in a time of change, and today's release is just an element in it that's moving us forward. Personally I am delighted to see work done rather than just talk talked. Let's look at some data points. * As a community we've moved to a place where using "OpenSolaris" directly as an element of the name of a binary distribution (rather than just in "fair use") has become a possibility, and we've had indications from the people with a veto over that usage that some formulation will be OK. * The first community project with the chance to do so is producing an alpha-level preview. * The name applied to that preview follows an approach explored in Santa Cruz and discussed here. * We now have a lump of code, that we can talk about. We can now make concrete proposals about how it should be shaped, and we can either try to convince the people doing the work to change things to make them better or, if we're able, make the changes ourselves. * The lump of code has a name, illustrative of the proposal we're already evolving, and we can shape that proposal and get it ready for the people with fiduciary responsibility for the Solaris trademark to review it and either agree or tell us it doesn't pass muster. Seems to me we are in a great position. Instead of endlessly talking, tearing each other apart, finding reasons to disagree, accusing some unseen "da Man", being rude about "marketing" and other manifestations of endless failure, we have an alpha code-base with an alpha name based on an alpha policy that we can drive forward together. It's only a fait accompli if we fail to engage to positively fix issues we believe exist. S. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
