Very simply Ian, I think a lot of people agree that the *end* result (a
binary downloadable called OpenSolaris) is probably a good thing.
What the community is objecting to is *how* we got there. Sun (or your
team) unilaterally decided to apply the brand, without really consulting
the community. A lot of people are feeling disenfranchised as a result.
-- Garrett
Ian Murdock wrote:
> All right.
>
> I don't even know where to begin.
>
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
>
> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
>
> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
>
> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
>
> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
>
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?
>
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>
> -ian
>
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
