I'm restarting this case, given the previous review and the fact that
this just addresses the issues it brought up I'm marking it closed
approved now. If anyone things it needs further review I'll start a timer.
The new technical part spec is as follows (and is in the case directory
as
*+1
*I too was going to request the pfiles change. (I'm just a little slow)
Thanks.*
*
On 6/8/2010 11:43 AM, Yun Zhou wrote:
Hi all,
As pointed out by a reviewer, I've made a minor change of the case:
below output of pfiles(1) has changed from auto-size: enabled to
autosize: drs for
On 06/17/10 11:21 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 10:54 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
My only concern is this paragraph:
The project team reserves the right to revise the exact list of
certificates and/or choose an entirely different source of certifcates
at anytime without
On 17/06/2010 16:21, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
While ARC may or may not be the best place to review changes to the
certificate list (it probably isn't), I think we should like to know how
revisions will be made -- i.e. who decides when a change is appropriate
and what the change will be? The
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 17:12 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 17/06/2010 16:21, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
While ARC may or may not be the best place to review changes to the
certificate list (it probably isn't), I think we should like to know how
revisions will be made -- i.e. who decides when
On 17/06/2010 19:29, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
I don't think it is necessarily true that these decisions or review, or
even a review of the process itself, have to be in the open, but I do
think that it is probably best if there is at least an internal closed
review covering the process used to
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 20:04 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 17/06/2010 19:29, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
I don't think it is necessarily true that these decisions or review, or
even a review of the process itself, have to be in the open, but I do
think that it is probably best if there is at
On 17/06/2010 20:07, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
There is a process internally, but I won't post the link to this case.
Can you at least post it somewhere where the other internal ARC members
can see it, or tell them how to verify the process if they should
need/want to?
Yes.
--
Darren J Moffat
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+arc/ARCAgenda/
= OpenSolaris ARC Agenda
= TELECONFERENCE NUMBERS:
(866)682-4770 (Within US)
(408)774-4073 (International)
ACCESS CODE 3950943
SECURITY CODE 6736
Times are US/Pacific Timezone
Meetings are at 10:00 Pacific unless otherwise
Darren,
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:54:54AM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
I'm restarting this case, given the previous review and the fact
that this just addresses the issues it brought up I'm marking it
closed approved now. If anyone things it needs further review I'll
start a timer.
This
PSARC members,
The project team has provided updated materials which have been placed
under
the commitment.materials directory. There is now an ARC cover page
(ARC-CoverPage.html) which describes the changes between the inception and
commitment materials.
I have also added the attached draft
11 matches
Mail list logo
