Tom, I'm sorry, I don't mean to lash out at you personally. I know you're doing the best you can given the framework you find yourself in. I apologize for my rudness.
Moving forwards, what are the legal ramifications of you keeping a blog updated on the status from I suppose the next code drop forward? i.e., letting us know what's been done one week, if you have plans on doing something the next, etc. Just to keep a more fine-grained stall on certain bits rather than the entire tree? I think that, more than anything, would help community involvement move forwards. As for the mac platform, I'm not so much "interested" as I happen to have a ppc mac. I'd love it to be running solaris also, but to be perfectly honest, I'm most interested in seeing solaris on IBM iron. Anyways, again, I'm sorry for being so rude cheers -john On 6/1/07, thomas riddle <tom.riddle at sun.com> wrote: > John, > > I can understand your position, but a degree of calmness would be > appreciated as we crank up the discussion. > > When we spoke offline about a month ago I gave you an update as to our > status. Between some basic legal review > and our heads in the sand here I personally was overally optimistic on > the timeline. But that's not a valid excuse really, > just that the technical tasks jump up the priority ladder as I am an > engr at heart. My apologies. So feel free to focus > your frustration on me for the delay and we can take that offline if you > wish. > > Your interest in the mac platform would be a great contribution. The > only current platform that the source is focused on > is the Genesi ODW, so there is alot of development opportunity there and > having a functioning reference source to start > with IMHO would be pretty beneficial. > > BTW, have you turned in an opensolaris developers agreement? > > Tom > > > > > John Sonnenschein wrote: > > > On 5/31/07, Noah yan <noah.yan at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> John, > >> > >> let me ask: what is your status of building and testing the current > >> available code base? > > > > > > I've got it built & it boots on my little G4 mac mini. It fails to set > > up it's memory along the way > > > >> what are you expecting from the coming code drop? > > > > > > I have no idea, and that's a large part of what gets me so pissed off > > at the whole process. Let me use a software metaphor here, and it's as > > if Sun Labs put a lock on the /entire/ codebase waiting to accomplish > > something. I'd be downright friendly if the lock were more fine > > grained ( eg, we got weekly updates something to the effect of "hey, > > i'm working on the scheduler this week" or "hey, i've fixed that > > memory mapping problem last week, I'm moving on to the kernel > > allocation routines for next" ), even if code didn't show up with the > > updates for a while, so that we could at least have a log of what does > > and does not work in order to focus our efforts elsewhere, presuming > > we get code on a fairly regular basis, not once per year. > > > >> It seems to me that you just want a code drop, not matter what it is. > > > > > > In a sense, perhaps. I very much believe in open development. If > > you're asking what I'd like to see, I'd like to see a kernel that > > completely works. That's just wishful thinking though and I don't > > expect a couple guys could get that much work done in that little > > time. A kernel that boots to single user would be nice if possible, > > but again, I have no idea what the status of the project is because > > it's been hidden behind sun's firewall for so long there's no way to > > guess what's going on > > > > > >> Noah > >> > >> On 5/31/07, John Sonnenschein <johnsonnenschein at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > No, it's an empty promise because every time anyone's asked about > >> > status they're given the same "yeah, we've got some stuff, we'll get > >> > it out really quick" response, yet we haven't heard so much as a word > >> > of what specifically is being worked on and I've stopped believing > >> > we'll ever see anything. > >> > > >> > If we get some code, great, but statements in the vein of "hold on, > >> > we're just finishing something" should be treated as the worthless > >> > empty statement it is. > >> > > >> > I'd love to be proved wrong, but at the moment I have Sun Labs > >> > categorized as "hostile to the community, under no circumstances > >> > should they be trusted" > >> > > >> > On 5/31/07, Brian D. Horn <Brian.Horn at sun.com> wrote: > >> > > John Sonnenschein wrote: > >> > > > On 5/31/07, Dennis Clarke <dclarke at blastwave.org> wrote: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > On 5/31/07, Brian D. Horn <Brian.Horn at sun.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Tom swears that he will get a new code drop with LOTS of > >> > > >> >> new goodies out soon. I'll pester him to make sure it > >> happens. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Yeah, tom has been promising us code "Real Soon Now" for a > >> long time, > >> > > >> > and all it's done is stalled community development, so I'm > >> not buying > >> > > >> > it & I'm quite frankly tired of hearing about it. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > If the code isn't open, it doesn't exist. Promises to the > >> contrary are > >> > > >> > more than unproductive, they're hostile to the project. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> John, chill out just a tad here. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> If you want to blame someone then fire some blame at me. I saw > >> > > >> that the > >> > > >> polaris.blastwave.org server was out of control and I shut it > >> down. It > >> > > >> would have been at about the same time as a big server room > >> move and > >> > > >> once > >> > > >> the new server room was in place and the rack rolled in I > >> simply never > >> > > >> brought it back up. Seen blastware lately? It is gone too as > >> are a > >> > > >> stack of the extensions to genunix.net etc etc. I simply > >> watched them > >> > > >> pass into nothingness. I'll go and register them again and > >> maybe even > >> > > >> recover blastware also. Who knows .. we may create a pure > >> community > >> > > >> based > >> > > >> distro yet. > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > It's not about blame. > >> > > > > >> > > > it's preposterous that even after I rant about how promises > >> that don't > >> > > > have included source code are damaging to the project, we're > >> given yet > >> > > > another empty promise! > >> > > > > >> > > > I don't care to hear "any time now"... I stand by my previous > >> > > > statement that if we can't see the code, it doesn't exist, and > >> saying > >> > > > that it does exist is just hurting us as a project. Whether > >> this harm > >> > > > is intentional or not is irrelevant to the fact that we're best > >> served > >> > > > by either development being open, or it not existing at all > >> > > I see.... I make a commitment that I will make something happen > >> in the > >> > > near future and since it didn't happen in the four minutes > >> between my > >> > > posting > >> > > and yours it was an empty promise.... hmmmmm..... > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > PGP Public Key 0x437AF1A1 > >> > Availiable on hkp://pgp.mit.edu > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > powerpc-discuss mailing list > >> > powerpc-discuss at opensolaris.org > >> > > >> > > > > > > -- PGP Public Key 0x437AF1A1 Availiable on hkp://pgp.mit.edu
