[arc-discuss] OpenSolaris, ARCs and the future.

[James Carlson]

Brian Utterback writes:
> Perhaps something like each community gets one voting membership on the
> ARC with some designated "ARC members at large"?  This would promote
> the wider range of review that we desire.

I see where you're going with that, but I think it's simpler just to
say that each (technical, at least) community needs to participate in
the ARC process.  That means encouraging experienced participants to
step forward and accept internships and memberships in the ARC.

The ARC definitely does benefit from having as diverse a membership as
possible.  This is hampered a bit when people decline to participate,
so we need to encourage people to participate.  Fortunately, the ARC
reviews are open to all who want to observe, question, or comment on
cases under review, so no "sign up" is required, and the members are
not idiots: we know that we don't know everything, and that we have to
call in experts from time to time or send some project teams off to
consult with appropriate groups.

Creating an automatic membership as part of the allotment each
community strikes me as too bureaucratic.  It sounds far too much like
the way in which representative standards committees are run, with
paid-for seats given to each nation, and those are far too political
for my taste.  More importantly, the ARC is _NOT_ intended as a
representative body.  We don't have individuals who "represent"
particular organizations within the ARC.  In fact, if we find that
someone is doing that, we'll take action to curtail that behavior.

It's intended to be technical, not political.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677