From benr at cuddletech.com Thu Feb 1 00:09:05 2007 From: benr at cuddletech.com (Ben Rockwood) Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 00:09:05 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> References: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C1A021.8060203@cuddletech.com> Michelle Olson wrote: > I think we should vote on something, with the new mechanism, before we > vote in the election. It is important to test the new mechanism and > our assumptions about how it will work. So, I'd vote to ratify the > Constitution first, to be sure it works well for everyone, then vote > to elect new membership on a separate ballot. > I agree with Michelle and would go further to say that the new OGB will be elected under the terms of the constitution... that can't happen if you're ratifying at the same time you're electing. Besides, what happens if the constitution doesn't ratify? You then have n people who believe they have been elected that are told "oops, never mind". Voting on both at one time may be expedient but it makes no sense and is likely to cause problems. benr. From al at logical-approach.com Thu Feb 1 09:04:31 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:04:31 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> References: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Michelle Olson wrote: > I think we should vote on something, with the new mechanism, before we > vote in the election. It is important to test the new mechanism and > our assumptions about how it will work. So, I'd vote to ratify the > Constitution first, to be sure it works well for everyone, then vote > to elect new membership on a separate ballot. Hi Michelle! If you're concerned about the voting mechanism itself, I don't think that we need to run an actual vote to confirm whether it works - since it's based on the same code/facility used by Apache.Org. A simple dummy test conducted by a selected group of test voters will confirm if the software works as intended. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Thu Feb 1 10:17:30 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 07:17:30 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: References: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C22EBA.9050606@sun.com> Al Hopper wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Michelle Olson wrote: > >> I think we should vote on something, with the new mechanism, before we >> vote in the election. It is important to test the new mechanism and >> our assumptions about how it will work. So, I'd vote to ratify the >> Constitution first, to be sure it works well for everyone, then vote >> to elect new membership on a separate ballot. > > Hi Michelle! If you're concerned about the voting mechanism itself, I > don't think that we need to run an actual vote to confirm whether it works > - since it's based on the same code/facility used by Apache.Org. A simple > dummy test conducted by a selected group of test voters will confirm if > the software works as intended. There's been zero details of this on the list so far - is it an open or closed voting system? web based? mail based? how does it handle proxying of votes? Time to google it I guess ;) Glynn From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Thu Feb 1 10:31:54 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 10:31:54 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <45C1A021.8060203@cuddletech.com> References: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> <45C1A021.8060203@cuddletech.com> Message-ID: <20070201183154.GB20150@sun.com> On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 12:09:05AM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote: > Besides, what happens if the constitution doesn't ratify? You then have > n people who believe they have been elected that are told "oops, never > mind". If the constitution isn't ratified, the results of the board election are discarded and not announced (or even not tallied in the first place). -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From mo137222 at jurassic.sfbay.Sun.COM Thu Feb 1 10:35:24 2007 From: mo137222 at jurassic.sfbay.Sun.COM (Michelle Olson) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 10:35:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? Message-ID: <200702011835.l11IZOf5611913@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Hi Al, Thanks for your response. I'm less concerned about the mechanism than the communication and expectations around it. A test of the mechanism that includes *everyone* who is eligible is the only way to know if what we've built with the constitution and voting mechanism will really work for the larger group. If you don't test it with 'the people' before you ask them to use it to make a decision about their leadership, I submit that it will not work. If and when folks complain about the rules or whatever, I don't think we can say 'but it works for Apache'! :) I'm not trying to be flip, but I'm remembering the Contributor Awards, which seemed like a totally clear-cut, simple thing to determine and it was a shame to watch 'in action'. I'd hate to repeat that history. If you send out the voting details for the constitution (which is what the community has asked for), run that vote with success, and ratify the document we'll be in a great position to determine new leadership. Adn ultimately, I think it will be faster that way because we'll avoid all the FUD and confusion...OK maybe not all of it :) but the worst of it. THanks for listening. -Michelle >X-Original-To: cab-discuss at opensolaris.org >Delivered-To: cab-discuss at opensolaris.org >Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:04:31 -0600 (CST) >From: Al Hopper >To: Michelle Olson >Subject: Re: [cab-discuss] Nominations? >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Cc: CAB Discuss >X-BeenThere: cab-discuss at opensolaris.org >X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 >List-Id: This list is used for general CAB discussion >List-Unsubscribe: , >List-Archive: >List-Post: >List-Help: >List-Subscribe: , > >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Michelle Olson wrote: > >> I think we should vote on something, with the new mechanism, before we >> vote in the election. It is important to test the new mechanism and >> our assumptions about how it will work. So, I'd vote to ratify the >> Constitution first, to be sure it works well for everyone, then vote >> to elect new membership on a separate ballot. > >Hi Michelle! If you're concerned about the voting mechanism itself, I >don't think that we need to run an actual vote to confirm whether it works >- since it's based on the same code/facility used by Apache.Org. A simple >dummy test conducted by a selected group of test voters will confirm if >the software works as intended. > >Regards, > >Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT >OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 >_______________________________________________ >cab-discuss mailing list >cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From sch at eng.sun.com Thu Feb 1 11:07:53 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:07:53 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <200702011835.l11IZOf5611913@jurassic.eng.sun.com> References: <200702011835.l11IZOf5611913@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <20070201190752.GE14105@eng.sun.com> * Michelle Olson [2007-02-01 10:35]: > Hi Al, > > Thanks for your response. I'm less concerned about the mechanism than > the communication and expectations around it. A test of the mechanism > that includes *everyone* who is eligible is the only way to know if > what we've built with the constitution and voting mechanism will > really work for the larger group. If you don't test it with 'the > people' before you ask them to use it to make a decision about their > leadership, I submit that it will not work. If and when folks complain > about the rules or whatever, I don't think we can say 'but it works > for Apache'! :) > > I'm not trying to be flip, but I'm remembering the Contributor Awards, > which seemed like a totally clear-cut, simple thing to determine and > it was a shame to watch 'in action'. I'd hate to repeat that history. > If you send out the voting details for the constitution (which is what > the community has asked for), run that vote with success, and ratify > the document we'll be in a great position to determine new leadership. > Adn ultimately, I think it will be faster that way because we'll avoid > all the FUD and confusion...OK maybe not all of it :) but the worst of > it. THanks for listening. I think a test of the election system with all eligible voters is reasonable. How about "did you enjoy voting on this question? 1-yes, 2-maybe, 3-no, 4-stv confuses me"? :) - Stephen From al at logical-approach.com Thu Feb 1 11:08:42 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 13:08:42 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <200702011835.l11IZOf5611913@jurassic.eng.sun.com> References: <200702011835.l11IZOf5611913@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Michelle Olson wrote: > Hi Al, > > Thanks for your response. I'm less concerned about the mechanism than > the communication and expectations around it. A test of the mechanism > that includes *everyone* who is eligible is the only way to know if > what we've built with the constitution and voting mechanism will > really work for the larger group. If you don't test it with 'the > people' before you ask them to use it to make a decision about their > leadership, I submit that it will not work. If and when folks complain > about the rules or whatever, I don't think we can say 'but it works > for Apache'! :) Fair enough. And I understand that you work with documentation - so you probably see more "opportunities" for confusion than I ever will! :) > I'm not trying to be flip, but I'm remembering the Contributor Awards, > which seemed like a totally clear-cut, simple thing to determine and > it was a shame to watch 'in action'. I'd hate to repeat that history. But I think, in this case, you're comparing apples to elephants - because the Contributor Awards were done with no tools and few ground rules - but with the very best of intentions. It resulted in a chaotic email exchange... > If you send out the voting details for the constitution (which is what > the community has asked for), run that vote with success, and ratify > the document we'll be in a great position to determine new leadership. > Adn ultimately, I think it will be faster that way because we'll avoid > all the FUD and confusion...OK maybe not all of it :) but the worst of > it. THanks for listening. Don't misunderstand me - I'm not dismissing your points and they present food for thought and serve (at least to me) as a warning to Proceed With Caution. With that in mind it would be smart to get more input and comments before we try to push a "this-will-work" type election/voting mechanism. I'll put this on the next CAB meeting to discuss. Stay tuned [I wonder where I got this "stay tuned" phrase from! :) ] And Thanks again for your input. > -Michelle .... email headers trimmed ..... > > > >On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Michelle Olson wrote: > > > >> I think we should vote on something, with the new mechanism, before > we > >> vote in the election. It is important to test the new mechanism and > >> our assumptions about how it will work. So, I'd vote to ratify the > >> Constitution first, to be sure it works well for everyone, then > vote > >> to elect new membership on a separate ballot. > > > >Hi Michelle! If you're concerned about the voting mechanism itself, > I > >don't think that we need to run an actual vote to confirm whether it > works > >- since it's based on the same code/facility used by Apache.Org. A > simple > >dummy test conducted by a selected group of test voters will confirm > if > >the software works as intended. > > > >Regards, > > > >Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com > > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > >OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 > Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 10:31:47 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 10:31:47 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <45C05378.2060009@sun.com> References: <45BFDD83.9010800@sun.com> <45C05378.2060009@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070205183147.GA16635@eng.sun.com> * Glynn Foster [2007-01-31 00:30]: Thanks for writing this up. > The OpenSolaris Governing Board is pleased to announce the start of > the annual elections to elect a governing board for 2007, under the > terms and conditions as set out in the OpenSolaris constitution. > > Who can vote? > > To be eligible to vote, you must be a current member of the OpenSolaris > community, as defined in the constitution, and be present on the current > voting list as prepared by the Secretary no more than 10 days before the > the start of the voting period for the elections. > > If you are not a member, you may either need to apply for membership, or > renew an expired membership and be present on the voting list no less than > 3 days prior to the start of the voting period for the elections. I would suggest capitalizing Member, Constitution, etc. I think a link to the draft Constitution on genunix.org is needed, at least as a footnote. Probably also an excuse about the bootstrap nature of this election. > Being a candidate > > Candidates for election to the OpenSolaris Governing Board must be > nominated by a current member, or themselves providing they are a > member, and be registered as an OpenSolaris participant. All > candidates should send an e-mail to > opensolaris-announce at opensolaris.org with your name, e-mail address, > corporate affiliation (if any), along with a description of why you'd > like to serve. > > If you are not a member and would like to stand for the election, you > must first apply for membership and be accepted to be eligible to run. I think the ordering here is backwards: any Participant can be nominated, but must be nominated by a Member. > The OpenSolaris Governing Board shall consist of 3 and a maximum of 7 > people elected by the members of the community. You may vote for up to > 7 people. I think we need to pick a specific number of seats, unless we're proposing something new. Seven was the result of discussions that led to the current draft. Well, the dates below will all have to slip now. > Timeline > (all deadlines are 23:59 UTC/18:59 EST) > > February 2007 > S M Tu W Th F S > (1) 2 3 Candidate nominations open > 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > (11)(12)13 14 15 16 17 Candidate nominations close (11th) > Campaigning begins (12th) > 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 > 25 (26)27(28) Voting list finalized (26th) > Campaigning finishes (28th) > > March 2007 > S M Tu W Th F S > (1) 2 3 Elections begin > 4 5 6 7 (8)(9)10 Elections finish (8th) > Election results announced (9th) > 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 > 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 > 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 I guess we can open on (8) February, so a one week slip. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 10:46:15 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 10:46:15 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? Message-ID: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. - Stephen ---- To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. The ballot consists of 2 questions. Question 1: Do you approve the document, http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 for use as the Constitution of the OpenSolaris Community? 1 - Approve 2 - Disapprove Question 2: Question 1, if approved, requires the election of a Governing Board. The participants below have been nominated as candidates to serve on a seven member Board. The Board members shall be selected by single transferable vote. Accordingly, please submit an ordered list of the candidates, showing your preference by placing most preferred candidate at the head of the list, followed by candidates of lower and lower preference. You may present a list of the entire slate, or a subset thereof. (The list is presented in a pre-selected random order.) 1 - J. Jones (jjones) 2 - S. Smith (ssmith) ... -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From richlowe at richlowe.net Mon Feb 5 11:03:55 2007 From: richlowe at richlowe.net (Richard Lowe) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:03:55 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> Stephen Hahn wrote: > A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. > Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. > > - Stephen > > ---- > > To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one > or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. The ballot > consists of 2 questions. > > Question 1: Do you approve the document, > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 > > for use as the Constitution of the OpenSolaris Community? > > 1 - Approve > 2 - Disapprove > > Question 2: Question 1, if approved, requires the election of a > Governing Board. The participants below have been nominated as > candidates to serve on a seven member Board. The Board members shall > be selected by single transferable vote. Accordingly, please submit > an ordered list of the candidates, showing your preference by placing > most preferred candidate at the head of the list, followed by > candidates of lower and lower preference. You may present a list of > the entire slate, or a subset thereof. (The list is presented in a > pre-selected random order.) > > 1 - J. Jones (jjones) > 2 - S. Smith (ssmith) > ... > It maybe worth explicitly stating how candidates not listed here are viewed in the order of preference (all equally at the very lowest level, I assume, but...) -- Rich From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 11:12:23 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 11:12:23 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> Message-ID: <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> * Richard Lowe [2007-02-05 11:04]: > Stephen Hahn wrote: > > A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. > > Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. > > > > - Stephen > > > >---- > > > > To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one > > or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. The ballot > > consists of 2 questions. > > > > Question 1: Do you approve the document, > > > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 > > > > for use as the Constitution of the OpenSolaris Community? > > > > 1 - Approve > > 2 - Disapprove > > > > Question 2: Question 1, if approved, requires the election of a > > Governing Board. The participants below have been nominated as > > candidates to serve on a seven member Board. The Board members shall > > be selected by single transferable vote. Accordingly, please submit > > an ordered list of the candidates, showing your preference by placing > > most preferred candidate at the head of the list, followed by > > candidates of lower and lower preference. You may present a list of > > the entire slate, or a subset thereof. (The list is presented in a > > pre-selected random order.) > > > > 1 - J. Jones (jjones) > > 2 - S. Smith (ssmith) > > ... > > It maybe worth explicitly stating how candidates not listed here are viewed > in the order of preference (all equally at the very lowest level, I > assume, but...) Sorry, I'm a bit slow today: are you asking about adding some clarification (or additional help text) to explain how candidates omitted from a submitted ballot are treated? Or something about the displayed list or the balloting prompt? - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From ian at ianshome.com Mon Feb 5 11:17:23 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:17:23 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> Stephen Hahn wrote: > A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. > Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. > > - Stephen > >---- > > To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one > or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. > Isn't that a little too restrictive? Ian. From richlowe at richlowe.net Mon Feb 5 11:18:40 2007 From: richlowe at richlowe.net (Richard Lowe) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:18:40 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C78310.8090606@richlowe.net> Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Richard Lowe [2007-02-05 11:04]: >> Stephen Hahn wrote: >>> A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. >>> Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. >>> >>> - Stephen >>> >>> ---- >>> >>> To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one >>> or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. The ballot >>> consists of 2 questions. >>> >>> Question 1: Do you approve the document, >>> >>> http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 >>> >>> for use as the Constitution of the OpenSolaris Community? >>> >>> 1 - Approve >>> 2 - Disapprove >>> >>> Question 2: Question 1, if approved, requires the election of a >>> Governing Board. The participants below have been nominated as >>> candidates to serve on a seven member Board. The Board members shall >>> be selected by single transferable vote. Accordingly, please submit >>> an ordered list of the candidates, showing your preference by placing >>> most preferred candidate at the head of the list, followed by >>> candidates of lower and lower preference. You may present a list of >>> the entire slate, or a subset thereof. (The list is presented in a >>> pre-selected random order.) >>> >>> 1 - J. Jones (jjones) >>> 2 - S. Smith (ssmith) >>> ... >> It maybe worth explicitly stating how candidates not listed here are viewed >> in the order of preference (all equally at the very lowest level, I >> assume, but...) > > Sorry, I'm a bit slow today: are you asking about adding some > clarification (or additional help text) to explain how candidates > omitted from a submitted ballot are treated? Or something about the > displayed list or the balloting prompt? > My bad, I realize that I wasn't so precise. If a subset of the total ballot is presented, how are candidates not included in that subset ranked? is what I'm thinking should perhaps be stated. -- Rich From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 11:31:44 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 11:31:44 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> Message-ID: <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:17]: > Stephen Hahn wrote: > > > A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. > > Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. > > > > - Stephen > > > >---- > > > > To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one > > or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. > > Isn't that a little too restrictive? That's what the draft Constitution says; the OGB elections are governed by http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03#ARTICLE_VI.__Governing_Board under the membership definition given in http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03#ARTICLE_IV.__Membership The question of "core contributor or contributor has vote" has been discussed in this forum, through the series of draft constitutions, over the past year. As I understand it, Draft 03 represents the current governance working group's and the Initial OGB's position accurately. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 11:41:12 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 11:41:12 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C78858.60302@Sun.Com> Stephen Hahn wrote: You may present a list of >>> the entire slate, or a subset thereof. (The list is presented in a >>> pre-selected random order.) >>> >>> 1 - J. Jones (jjones) >>> 2 - S. Smith (ssmith) >>> ... >> It maybe worth explicitly stating how candidates not listed here are viewed >> in the order of preference (all equally at the very lowest level, I >> assume, but...) > > Sorry, I'm a bit slow today: are you asking about adding some > clarification (or additional help text) to explain how candidates > omitted from a submitted ballot are treated? Or something about the > displayed list or the balloting prompt? > > - Stephen > What is the difference between A) a complete ordered list of all candidates, and B) a partial list when seen from the ballot counting perspective for candidates not on "B". In particular, in a strict STV scenario, an "A" vote impacts every candidate's position, while a "B" vote does nothing for candidates who are not mentioned. Also, I would want to make sure that there are statistical checks in the ballot counting routines to detect whether or not the tally aligns with the random presentation order, to make sure we can tell if a significant number of people simply copy/pasted the list. I'm not sure what we would do if it turned out that way, but I think we need this to understand and validate the voting process itself. -John From ian at ianshome.com Mon Feb 5 11:41:47 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:41:47 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> Stephen Hahn wrote: >* Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:17]: > > >>Stephen Hahn wrote: >> >> >> >>> A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. >>> Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. >>> >>> - Stephen >>> >>>---- >>> >>> To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one >>> or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. >>> >>> >>Isn't that a little too restrictive? >> >> > > That's what the draft Constitution says; the OGB elections are > governed by > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03#ARTICLE_VI.__Governing_Board > > under the membership definition given in > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03#ARTICLE_IV.__Membership > > The question of "core contributor or contributor has vote" has been > discussed in this forum, through the series of draft constitutions, > over the past year. As I understand it, Draft 03 represents the > current governance working group's and the Initial OGB's position > accurately. > > > Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I can to over the past 20 months. Ian From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 11:47:37 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 11:47:37 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C78858.60302@Sun.Com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> <45C78858.60302@Sun.Com> Message-ID: <20070205194737.GG16635@eng.sun.com> * John Plocher [2007-02-05 11:41]: > Stephen Hahn wrote: > You may present a list of > >>> the entire slate, or a subset thereof. (The list is presented in a > >>> pre-selected random order.) > >>> > >>> 1 - J. Jones (jjones) > >>> 2 - S. Smith (ssmith) > >>> ... > >>It maybe worth explicitly stating how candidates not listed here are > >>viewed in the order of preference (all equally at the very lowest level, > >> I assume, but...) > > > > Sorry, I'm a bit slow today: are you asking about adding some > > clarification (or additional help text) to explain how candidates > > omitted from a submitted ballot are treated? Or something about the > > displayed list or the balloting prompt? > > Also, I would want to make sure that there are statistical checks in > the ballot counting routines to detect whether or not the tally aligns > with the random presentation order, to make sure we can tell if a > significant number of people simply copy/pasted the list. Really? I was merely planning to offer the anonymized ballots as a public document, so that anyone could choose to do such analysis... > I'm not sure what we would do if it turned out that way, but I think > we need this to understand and validate the voting process itself. By the way, I wasn't planning on placing a directly cut-and-paste'able form in the ballot--the example would be invalid for the election (like numbers starting with 100, or somesuch). The prompt could be a request for an entire list, or we could do something like 1 - J. Jones (jjones) ... Ballot so far [ssmith ...]. Next selection (enter x when complete): - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 11:54:32 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 11:54:32 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> Message-ID: <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: > Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. > > I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I > can to over the past 20 months. There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then approach one or more OGB members with your case. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 12:16:19 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 12:16:19 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205194737.GG16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> <45C78858.60302@Sun.Com> <20070205194737.GG16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C79093.1040702@Sun.Com> Stephen Hahn wrote: > By the way, I wasn't planning on placing a directly cut-and-paste'able Fine - my concern magically evaporated :-) > form in the ballot--the example would be invalid for the election > (like numbers starting with 100, or somesuch). The prompt could be a > request for an entire list, or we could do something like Is there an existing example site to play with? This sounds a lot like the "select your locale" sysid cruft that install uses :-), and forces a rather stilted user interface, not to mention the incorrect prioritization baggage that ordered lists of numbers bring along . I'd rather see two parallel columns of names, with controls to move nominees on and off the ballot, as well as ordering the candidates once on the ballot: +----------------+ +--------+ | Nominees table | | Ballot | +----------------+ +--------+ | J Jones | => | | | L Lewis | <= | | | M Marks | ^ | | | N Noyes | v | | | Z Zelda | | | +----------------+ +--------+ Of course this requires website UI work, but since Sun ships web toolkit software that does this in NetBeans and other places, it should not be too difficult. If the nominee table allowed the user to search, as well as sort by name, by email, and/or by community[1], so much the better. ---- [1] I presume nominees, being community members, can easily be associated with the names of the communities they are from... > > 1 - J. Jones (jjones) > ... > > Ballot so far [ssmith ...]. Next selection (enter x when > complete): In this case, I'd alphabetize the list /IF/ there were more than a dozen or so nominees (I dread trying to find your name in a randomized list of 200 people :-) Alternatively, is there a way to ensure that each voter gets a different random ordering of candidates? -John From Bonnie.Corwin at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 12:39:16 2007 From: Bonnie.Corwin at Sun.COM (Bonnie Corwin) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 13:39:16 -0700 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C795F4.6060405@Sun.COM> Stephen Hahn wrote: > A possible draft ballot (to be wedged into the software) is below. > Feedback on language, presented information, etc. is greatly desired. > > - Stephen > > ---- > > To participate in this ballot, you must be a Core Contributor to one > or more Community Groups in the OpenSolaris Community. The ballot > consists of 2 questions. I think many people might read the opening paragraph and think "how do I know if I'm a Core Contributor?" Is there any way to put a sentence or two on the ballot itself that will send people to the right place to find out if they are one, and if not, what, if anything, they can do about that? Will we be posting the final list of Core Contributors that you've been collecting for this election? If so, a pointer to that and short text about when that list closed might be sufficient. > > Question 1: Do you approve the document, > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 > > for use as the Constitution of the OpenSolaris Community? > > 1 - Approve > 2 - Disapprove > > Question 2: Question 1, if approved, requires the election of a > Governing Board. The participants below have been nominated as > candidates to serve on a seven member Board. The Board members shall > be selected by single transferable vote. Accordingly, please submit Should there be a pointer to a definition of "single transferable vote"? > an ordered list of the candidates, showing your preference by placing > most preferred candidate at the head of the list, followed by > candidates of lower and lower preference. You may present a list of > the entire slate, or a subset thereof. (The list is presented in a > pre-selected random order.) Is there a minimum? If someone doesn't want to order the whole list, do you want an ordered list of seven? Or can someone just vote for one person? Bonnie > > 1 - J. Jones (jjones) > 2 - S. Smith (ssmith) > ... > From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 12:53:12 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 12:53:12 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C79093.1040702@Sun.Com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C77F9B.90608@richlowe.net> <20070205191223.GD16635@eng.sun.com> <45C78858.60302@Sun.Com> <20070205194737.GG16635@eng.sun.com> <45C79093.1040702@Sun.Com> Message-ID: <20070205205312.GI16635@eng.sun.com> * John Plocher [2007-02-05 12:16]: > Stephen Hahn wrote: > > By the way, I wasn't planning on placing a directly cut-and-paste'able > > Fine - my concern magically evaporated :-) > > > > form in the ballot--the example would be invalid for the election > > (like numbers starting with 100, or somesuch). The prompt could be a > > request for an entire list, or we could do something like > > Is there an existing example site to play with? This sounds > a lot like the "select your locale" sysid cruft that install > uses :-), and forces a rather stilted user interface, not to > mention the incorrect prioritization baggage that ordered lists > of numbers bring along . > > [interesting UI ideas elided] Unfortunately, we are a bit more time-constrained than that. I am taking the Apache software, and trying to map its operations to the credential storage we have on opensolaris.org. In some cases, that means that I can reuse the Apache code, although I keep finding myself wondering about reimplementing specific pieces... We'll see where I am late tonight. > > 1 - J. Jones (jjones) > > ... > > > > Ballot so far [ssmith ...]. Next selection (enter x when > > complete): > > > In this case, I'd alphabetize the list /IF/ there were more than a dozen > or so nominees (I dread trying to find your name in a randomized list > of 200 people :-) > > Alternatively, is there a way to ensure that each voter gets > a different random ordering of candidates? We can do that; it's just shuffling a card deck. I think that the nomination procedure is unlikely to lead to more than dozens, but your point still makes sense. Any other opinions on a global, once-shuffled list versus an individually per-ballot shuffled list? (Also, don't forget: we'll need a voter information page, with any submitted or offered blog posts/candidate statements, and it wouldn't hurt to see a fourth estate effort of some kinds, with opinion or interviews. Or maybe just naked advocacy...) - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 13:16:37 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 13:16:37 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] List of members, 2/5 Message-ID: <20070205211636.GA17016@eng.sun.com> Attached is the most recent list of Contributors and Core Contributors. According to this list there are 237 unique Core Contributors. Keep the additions and corrections coming... - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ -------------- next part -------------- academic contributor joe.g driving edu engagement in India academic contributor moinakg driving edu engagement in India, Belenix creator academic contributor patrickf previous community leader and core contributor academic core joey drove curriculum effort in China, Starter Kit translation academic core michelle wrote curriculum guide, key Starter Kit contributor academic core teresag community leader approach contributor anay significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor anupcs significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor bustos significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor carlsonj significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor darrenm significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor davidjon significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor dminer significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor kcpoon significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor lianep significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor meem significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor mph significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor okie significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor sfbiggar significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor xzh significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach core jbeck project leader for NWAM project discussions arc contributor ahl arc contributor ahrens arc contributor alanh arc contributor alanp arc contributor alecm arc contributor alib arc contributor anish arc contributor artem arc contributor asano arc contributor barts arc contributor blu arc contributor bonwick arc contributor by38662 arc contributor calum arc contributor casper arc contributor ceci.hu arc contributor cindi arc contributor cth arc contributor darrenr arc contributor dchieu arc contributor dp arc contributor is arc contributor jbeck arc contributor jg arc contributor jhf arc contributor johnz arc contributor kupfer arc contributor lianep arc contributor mahaines arc contributor maybee arc contributor meem arc contributor mws arc contributor petede arc contributor pgdh arc contributor raf arc contributor randyf arc contributor rie arc contributor sarito arc contributor sch arc contributor seb arc contributor song arc contributor speer arc contributor taylor arc contributor tcm arc contributor tsk arc contributor wendy.phillips arc contributor wyllys arc core carlsonj arc core edgould arc core glenn arc core gww arc core jek3 arc core kais arc core plocher arc core sommerfe arc core tpm brandz contributor ahl Adam Leventhal developed the BrandZ DTrace and ptrace support brandz contributor hannken Juergen Hannken-Illjes has contributed a number of bugfixes to BrandZ. brandz contributor jcm Jerri-Ann Meyer is the engineering manager for BrandZ brandz contributor kirk Kirk Wells is the program manager for BrandZ brandz core edp Ed Pilatowicz owns all the BrandZ device support brandz core kucharsk Bill Kucharski owns the BrandZ installation support, as well as everything to do with signals. brandz core nilsn Nils Nieuwejaar is the technical lead for BrandZ brandz core rab Russ Blaine owns all BrandZ work related to linking and debugging cab contributor benr cab contributor sch cab contributor wesolows cab core alhopper cab core casper cab core fielding cab core rich cab core webmink desktop contributor calumb Calum Benson desktop contributor drdoug Doug Scott desktop contributor ericb Eric Boutilier desktop contributor justinc Justin Conover desktop contributor kmays Ken Mays desktop contributor steleman Stefan Teleman desktop core davelam Dave Lin desktop core dcarbery Damien Carbery desktop core dermot Dermot McCluskey desktop core dkenny Darren Kenny desktop core gman Glynn Foster desktop core laca Laca Peter desktop core padraig Padraig O'Briain desktop core yippi Brian Cameron desktop core yippi Brian Cameron documentation contributor alta Alta Elstad provided the Device Driver Tutorial as open source and is a leader of the Device Driver community documentation contributor cindys Cindy Swearingen provided the ZFS ADmin Guide as open source and is a leader of the ZFS community documentation contributor dlindt David Lindt contributed feedback on community direction and helps laision for docs between SDN and OpenSolaris documentation contributor frankho Frank Hoffman contributed Crashdump analysis book and aggregate of blogs about filesystem development documentation contributor gherteg Glenn Herteg contibuted How To Setup OpenSolaris with Yahoo DSL and feedback on IPFilter docs and code impl documentation contributor ginnie Ginnie Wray contributed content for the original Big Doc List and an install tech talk documentation contributor layne Layne Ethington contributed nfsmapid description for community review documentation contributor linnea Linnea Wickstrom has contributed feedback and suggestions on the web site design documentation contributor markb Mark Brundege developed the tool to convert Solbook to DocBook documentation contributor mickm Michael Monaghan contributed tools and design to convert the global glossary to a wikipedia documentation contributor mws Mike Shapiro provided the Dynamic Tracing Guide as open source and is a leader of the DTrace community documentation contributor sbrucker Stephanie Brucker has addressed community feedback on IPFilter docs and is a leader of Quagga project documentation contributor wesolows Keith Wesolowski contributed the OpenSolaris Developer's reference guide as open source documentation core benr Ben Rockwood has created the wiki and source repository for our community along with defining direction of tools documentation core bgregg Brendan Gregg has contributed several documents and leadership on direction of the Docs community documentation core elowe Eric Lowe has provided conversion tools and engineering expertise to help provide books as open source documentation core rheilke Rainer Heilke has provided consistently helpful feedback on writing guidelines and developed a quick start documentation core sweber Sue Weber has defined the roadmap and worked closely with legal to determine licensing practices dtrace core ahl Initial core contributor dtrace core bgregg Initial core contributor dtrace core bmc Initial core contributor dtrace core mws Initial core contributor fm contributor eschrock Eric Schrock fm contributor sethg Seth Goldberg fm contributor wesolows Keith Wesolowski fm core cindi Cindi McGuire fm core cwb Chris Beal fm core gavinm Gavin Maltby fm core mws Mike Shapiro fm core robj Rob Johnston fm core stephh Steve Hanson i18n contributor brig Brigitte contributed French localization style guide for the French group and active in the French group. i18n contributor by38662 Brian is the leader of Chinese groups. i18n contributor cerveny Martin is the Czech group leader. i18n contributor csj J\341nos is the Hugarian group leader. i18n contributor jayaradh Jayaradha is the leader of Indic groups. i18n contributor mayoral Luis is the Spanish group leader. i18n contributor rrabadan Ruben contributed Latin American keyboard layout files and other necessary changes. i18n contributor ss39446 Siva contributed Tamil UTF-8 locale to the community. i18n contributor suresh Suresh is the Malayalam group leader. i18n contributor tifeo Daniele is the Italian group leader. i18n contributor tonyn Tony is the Vietnamese group leader. i18n core is Ienup is a community leader and tries to contribute in various areas and aspects of the community. i18n core laurent Laurent is the French group leader and actively maintains the French group. i18n core thiguchi Takaaki is the Japanese group leader and actively maintains the Japanese group. i18n core vinny Vinny is the Portuguese Brazil leader and actively maintains the Portuguese Brazil group. i18n core yjsong Young is a community leader and tries to contribute in various areas and aspects of the community. immigrants contributor tdh Authoring and blogging about OpenSolaris and Solaris for newcomers. immigrants core ahl Initial core contributor. immigrants core benr Presently leading community. install contributor Bart Smaalders install contributor James Falkner install contributor Matt Williamson install contributor Mike Gerdts install core Dave Miner install core Ethan Quach install core Glenn Lagasse install core James Carlson install core Jan Damborsky install core Mary Ding install core Peter Tribble install core Sanjay Nadkarni install core Sarah Jelinek install core Sundar Yamunachari install core Susan Sohn install core Tim Knitter install core Vassili Igouchkine install core William Schumann marketing contributor bonnie on all calls, great reviewer, helps to balance mktg with eng requirements marketing contributor richteer another voice of the community and willing reviewer on docs and proposals marketing contributor spp Stephen is always willing to offer input on mktg activities marketing core benr voice of community a lot for mktg ideas marketing core lkr healthy participator in conversations and proposals marketing core patrickf bi-weekly stats contributions, conversation on list marketing core sarad community lead marketing core teresag Community support and integration with other communities marketing core timf offers all sorts of help and input and support mdb core ahl mdb core eschrock mdb core johnlev mdb core mws mdb core simmonmt network contributor carlsonj numerous contributions to various community discussions network contributor carolg provided various important support to the community and the Crossbow project network contributor danmcd multiple contributions to various discussions, submitted design docs for review network contributor darrenr multiple contributions to IPFilter and other design reviews network contributor dme significant contributions to community discussions network contributor kais contributed to various discussions of the community and Crossbow project network contributor krgopi Rajagopal Kunhappan - Contributor to Solaris networking in general, Crossbow and Nemo network contributor mll3k Mike Lim - Contributor to the crossbow admin model discussion on opensolaris network contributor nordmark several contributions to various discussions of the networking community and Crossbow project network contributor rshoaib numerous contributions to various community discussions network contributor seb significant contributions to Clearview project and other discussions, submitted design docs for review network contributor yun Cathy Zhou - Clearview lead engineer - Run all design discussion on the project's OpenSolaris page network contributor yun significant contributions to discussions, submitted design docs for review network core carlsonj James Carlson - Architect and active contributor to crossbow-discuss, clearview, networking ... network core darrenr Darren Reed - Active contributor to multiple networking related projects. Author of the Open source IPFilter network core kais Kais Belgaied - Co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris network core meem numerous contributions to discussions, lead of Clearview project network core ndroux numerous contributions to various discussions, active co-leader of the Nemo and Crossbow projects network core nordmark Erik Nordmark leader of the IP instances project on OpenSolaris. Active contributor to the network community - co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris network core sunay active co-leader of the Crossbow project, significant contributions of architecture documents to the community network core thiru Thirumalai Sinivasan Subject matter expert for the core networking. networking contributor danmcd Dan McDonald networking contributor markfen Mark Fenwick networking contributor pwernau Paul Wernau networking contributor sommerfeld Bill Sommerfeld nfs core robert_gordon Robert Gordon nfs core shepler Spencer Shepler nfs core siddheshwar Siddheshwar V. Mahesh on contributor carlsonj James Carlson - Architect and active contributor to crossbow-discuss, clearview, networking ... on contributor darrenr Darren Reed - Active contributor to multiple networking related projects. Author of the Open source IPFilter on contributor kais Kais Belgaied - Co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris on contributor krgopi Rajagopal Kunhappan - Contributor to Solaris networking in general, Crossbow and Nemo on contributor mll3k Mike Lim - Contributor to the crossbow admin model discussion on opensolaris on contributor nordmark Erik Nordmark leader of the IP instances project on OpenSolaris. Active contributor to the network community - co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris on contributor thiru Thirumalai Sinivasan Subject matter expert for the core networking. on contributor yun Cathy Zhou - Clearview lead engineer - Run all design discussion on the project's OpenSolaris page on core ags on core ahl on core ahrens on core artem on core barts on core batschul on core billt on core bmc on core bonwick on core bubbva on core bw on core casper on core cindi on core comay on core cwb on core damico on core dduvall on core dep on core djl on core dmick on core eshrock on core exodus on core frits on core gavinm on core jbeck on core jg on core jhd on core johnz on core kupfer on core lclee on core maybee on core mikechr on core minh on core mjnelson on core mws on core nickto on core nilsn on core petede on core peteh on core raf on core sch on core sdussud on core sethg on core shao on core shepler on core tpm on core wendyp performance core akolb Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core andrei Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core barts Contributor in many areas of performance characterization and improvement. performance core dp Contributes to many areas of OpenSolaris. performance core esaxe Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core jjc Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core johansen performance core mpogue Experienced in the area of Kernel Performance. performance core rmc Contributor in many areas of performance characterization and improvement. ppc contributor bbrv active in forum ppc contributor bochnig source contributor, active in forum ppc contributor cjs supports Polaris Wiki, active in forum ppc contributor joerg active in forum ppc contributor kmays active in forum ppc contributor kucharsk technical info provider ppc contributor mwsealey active in forum ppc contributor nerant source contributor, active in forum ppc contributor svenl active in forum ppc contributor szhou Shudong Zhou active in forum ppc contributor yanyh source contributor, active in forum ppc core ahl original leader, was active in forum ppc core dclarke hosts Polaris site, original organizer, ppc core imp leads community contribution, active in forum ppc core rarebit leads SunLabs contribution and overall port effort security contributor danmcd Dan McDonald security contributor markfen Mark Fenwick security contributor pwernau Paul Wernau security contributor sommerfeld Bill Sommerfeld smf contrib arushi04 doc and help contributor smf contrib bnsmb doc contributor (FAQ) smf contrib dminer help and code contributor smf contrib fourctom code contributor smf contrib hshaw code contributor smf contrib jeanm code contributor smf contrib jkeil code contributor smf contrib kathy doc and help contributor smf contrib nico help contributor smf contrib richlowe code contributor smf contrib yannouch code contributor smf core bustos doc, help, code contributor and project lead smf core dep doc, help, code contributor and project lead smf core jwadams doc, help, and code contributor smf core lianep doc, help, and code contributor smf core sch doc, help, and code contributor testing contributor jleser John supports opensolaris testing testing contributor robj discussion, blogs and UG meetings testing core cmnolan ON-PIT, self-service testing core contributor testing core fintanr Fintan leads performance test areas and part of self-service team testing core helenc nfs test lead testing core jwalker Jim leads testing and does discussions, blogs and UG meetings testing core michaelb discussions, UG meetings testing core nickyv Perf-PIT core contributor testing core quim ON-PIT, self-service testing core contributor testing core seanmcg performance discussions, blogs and UG meetings testing core timf Tim is a big contributor: discussions, blogs and UG meetings tools contrib casper cscope-fast contribution; SCM (esp. Teamware) knowledge tools contrib comay multiple bfu contributions tools contrib danmcd multiple tools putbacks (crypto) tools contrib dmick multiple tools contributions tools contrib dp multiple contributions tools contrib eschrock multiple tools contributions tools contrib girishl multiple tools contributions (sun4v support) tools contrib jg multiple tools contributions tools contrib johnz crypto tools expert tools contrib jwadams multiple tools contributions tools contrib lclee multiple bfu contributions tools contrib rab multiple contributions tools contrib richlowe bfu and build contributions tools contrib robinson multiple bfu contributions tools contrib rorth multiple contributions to tools and other areas tools contrib semery multiple bfu contributions tools contrib sherrym multiple tools contributions tools contrib simmonmt part of original CTF team tools contrib szhou multiple tools contributions tools contrib tucker contribution to bfu and crypto tool handling tools contrib willf multiple contributions to wx tools core alanbur responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core ali Developer of link-editing technology, related tools, and associated documentation. tools core darrenm crypto tools expert tools core dduvall ON gatekeeper tools core fvdl responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core garypen responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core johnlev multiple ctf contributions tools core kupfer responsible for current opensolaris build infrastructure tools core meem multiple tools contributions; strong cleanliness proponent tools core mike_s long-time expert on the build tools core mjnelson onnv tech lead tools core petede Nevada assistant tech lead tools core raf CRT advocate covering the build tools core rie Developer of link-editing technology, related tools, and associated documentation. tools core sch responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core setje newboot expert tools core sommerfeld multiple contributions; strong cleanliness proponent tools core stevel responsible for current opensolaris build infrastructure, SCM tools core wesolows responsible for the shadow build infrastructure, gcc usergroup contributor sriramn Sriram has been a very active contributor in the BOSUG mailing list usergroup core a.sundar Chennai OSUG A. Sundararajan usergroup core aalok Alok Aggarwal ATLOSUG contributor & Solaris developer usergroup core adam_Z Adam Zhang started and runs Shanghai User Group. usergroup core akolb Alexander Kolbasov leader in the MOSUG usergroup core aland Alan Duboff started and runs the SVOSUG usergroup core aland Silicon Valley OSUG Alan DuBoff usergroup core alanh Alan Hargreaves started and runs the SOSUG. usergroup core alanh Sydney OSUG Alan Hargreaves usergroup core andrei Moscow OSUG Andrei Dorofeev usergroup core Ashok Ashok Kumar Gupta Madurai OSUG member usergroup core asyd Bruno Bonfils leader of the FOSUG usergroup core bgregg Brendan Gregg Repeat Presentor and DTrace Guru, SOSUG usergroup core bm91119 Bart Muijzer started and runs NLOSUG usergroup core boyd Boyd Adamson presenter, SOSUG usergroup core bubli Czech OSUG Katarina Machalkova usergroup core casper Casper Dik runs NLOSUG usergroup core cerveny Czech OSUG Martin Cerveny usergroup core che Ch? Kristo Driving force to the formation of the SOSUG usergroup core codelion Asankhaya Sharma started and runs the NITW opensolaris group usergroup core codelion Warangal NIT OSUG Asankhaya Sharma usergroup core davemq Austin OSUG Dave Marquardt usergroup core dickson Atlanta OSUG Scott Dickson usergroup core dickson Scott Dickson leader of the ATLOSUG usergroup core e1_sun Iwan Rahabok leader of the Singapore OSUG. usergroup core eggboy Jay Lee started and leads the KOSUG usergroup core elowe Eric Lowe coordinated and has spoken at the Austin OSUG usergroup core ericb Eric Boutilier contributes to the UG community, started the GLUG usergroup core ericb Great Lakes OSUG Eric Boutilier usergroup core fintanr Fintan Ryan IEOSUG leader, OS test usergroup core fintanr Irish OSUG Fintan Ryan usergroup core flip SVOSUG Phillip "Flip" Russell usergroup core forrest Beijing OSUG Jun-Chao Forrest Wu usergroup core ghreyes Gustavo Reyes contributes heavily to the AOSUG usergroup core ginnie Front Rage OSUG Ginnie Wray usergroup core ginnie Virginia Wray started and runs the FROSUG usergroup core gmack Gregg Mackenzie involved in FROSUG usergroup core grahadea Grahadea Kusuf started and runs OSUG-Indonesia usergroup core gwilson George Wilson ATLOSUG leader usergroup core hsaltiel Argentina OSUG Hern?n Saltiel usergroup core hsaltiel Hern?n Saltiel started and runs Argentine AOSUG usergroup core iktorn Victor Latushkin leader in the MOSUG usergroup core imp Israel OSUG Cyril Plisko usergroup core jclulow Joshua Clulow consistantly present in #opensolaris for SOSUG usergroup core jco Swiss OSUG Javier Conde usergroup core jjj Joep Vesseur runs NLOSUG usergroup core jmcp James McPherson Repeat Presenter, SOSUG usergroup core jonb FROSUG Jon Bowman usergroup core jonb Jon Bowman started and runs FROSUG usergroup core jurikm Milan Jurik Czech OSUG leader usergroup core jurikm Czech OSUG Milan Jurik usergroup core jwalker Jim Walker started and involved in FROSUG usergroup core kavit Kavit Munshi Presenter and early Driver, SOSUG usergroup core kjelle Kjell H?gstr?m started and runs SWOSUG usergroup core kjelle Sweden OSUG Kjell H?gstr?m usergroup core kjy02i Roger Kim KOSUG member usergroup core km103805 Swiss OSUG Karim Mazouni usergroup core knoche Bill Knoche involved in FROSUG usergroup core laurent French OSUG Laurent Blume usergroup core laurent Laurent Blume FOSUG leader usergroup core lisagab FROSUG Lisa M. Week usergroup core lisagab Lisa Week started and runs the FROSUG usergroup core lkr New England OSUG Laura Ramsey usergroup core lxf Xinfeng Liu started and runs Shanghai User Group. usergroup core macrae Adhari C Mahendra runs OSUG-Indonesia usergroup core matty Ryan Matteson open source contributor and active in ATLOSUG usergroup core mcerveny Martin Cerveny Czech OSUG leader usergroup core Mdavemq Dave Marquardt helped set up and run the Austin OSUG usergroup core mmman Czech OSUG Martin Man usergroup core mmman Martin Man Czech OSUG leader usergroup core moinakg Moinak is the lead developer of the BeleniX OpenSolaris distro usergroup core mwaterl FROSUG Moriah Waterland usergroup core mwaterl Moriah Waterland started and runs FROSUG usergroup core mwolfe Raleigh OSUG Michael Wolfe usergroup core nathank Nathan Kroenert Presenter, SOSUG usergroup core nerant Jeremy Teo contributes to the Singapore OSUG usergroup core nino German OSUG Nenad Cimerman usergroup core ofsen Turkey OSUG Omer Faruk Sen usergroup core oliver Beijing OSUG Oliver Yang usergroup core patrickf Patrick Finch patrickf, runs NLOSUG. usergroup core pbg New England OSUG Peter Baer Galvin usergroup core petervg Peter van Gemer runs NLOSUG usergroup core pgomez1 Venezuela OSUG Pedro Gomez usergroup core praveen Praveen Krishnamoorthy started and runs Madurai OSUG usergroup core pwl Peter Lees early driver, SOSUG usergroup core ravisank Ravisankar Balaji Madurai OSUG member usergroup core remcof Remco Fug runs NLOSUG usergroup core samf FROSUG Sam L. Falkner usergroup core samf Sam Falkner started and runs FROSUG usergroup core sarad Austin OSUG Sara Dornsife usergroup core sarad Sara Dornsife got the Austin OSUG going. usergroup core seanmcg Sean McGrath IEOSUG contributor extraordinaire, OS test usergroup core sep Russia OSUG Sergei Pikalev usergroup core shambles Sean Sprague leads the LOSUG. usergroup core skamm Susan Kamm-Worrell runs FROSUG usergroup core sqliang Singapore OSUG Seng-Quee Liang usergroup core subhash Hyderabad OSUG Subhash Singh Thakur usergroup core thiguchi Nihon Sun UG Takaaki Higuchi usergroup core timf Tim Foster IEOSUG leader, marketing wannabe, zfs fan, OS test usergroup core tunla Lars Tunkrans runs SWOSUG usergroup core twest Tom West involved in FROSUG usergroup core ulf London OSUG Ulf Andreasson usergroup core venkytv Bangalore OSUG Venky TV usergroup core venkytv Venkateshwara TV leader of the BOSUG usergroup core victor Beijing OSUG Di-Li Victor Hu x core alanc (Alan Coopersmith) x core jacotton (Jay Cotton) x core skk (Stuart Kreitman) zfs core ahrens Initial core contributor zfs core billm Initial core contributor zfs core bonwick Initial core contributor zfs core chua Initial core contributor zfs core cindys Initial core contributor zfs core dp Initial core contributor zfs core eschrock Initial core contributor zfs core goo Initial core contributor zfs core johansen zfs core lalt Initial core contributor zfs core marks Initial core contributor zfs core maybee Initial core contributor zfs core ndellofa Initial core contributor zfs core perrin Initial core contributor zfs core tabriz Initial core contributor zones contrib jeffv Jeff Victor is a frequent and valuable contributor to the zones community zones contributor mgerdts Community contributor to zones development zones contributor pcotten Technical writer for zones zones contributor richlowe Community contributor to zones development zones core allan Allan McKillop is the engineering manager for zones zones core annt Ann Togasaki is the program manager for zones zones core comay David Comay is the technical lead for zones zones core dp Dan Price is a senior engineer working on zones zones core gjelinek Jerry Jelinek is a senior engineer working on zones zones core stevelaw Steve Lawrence is an engineer working on resource management, which has direct relationship with the zones community. From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 13:34:11 2007 From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 22:34:11 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] List of members, 2/5 In-Reply-To: <20070205211636.GA17016@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205211636.GA17016@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <200702052134.l15LYBer001093@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> I appear not to have send in the votes for the laptop community. (Quick pick from the leaders and observers; speak up in case of disagreement) laptop core andrei laptop core nadkarni laptop core casper laptop core bobn laptop core bustos laptop core quaker laptop core brian.xu laptop core ceci.hu laptop core judy laptop core dchieu laptop contributor gdamore From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 13:41:46 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 10:41:46 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> Hey, Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: >> Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. >> >> I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I >> can to over the past 20 months. > > There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core > Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a > specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core > Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then > approach one or more OGB members with your case. Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his reactions to it [http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/26012007]. As I see it, it's not a fair reflection of the people involved in the community at all - in most cases, it's the result of some pretty bad feedback from the various communities, with not a lot of thought going into the list and its consequences [1] Quite what can be done at this stage, I have no idea. Glynn [1] And in some ways it's absolutely correct eg. DTrace - Bryan, Adam, Mike and Brendan were all *heavily* responsible for the code they wrote and they have the right to feel proud of that. On the other hand, it's not terribly encouraging to others trying to get more involved. I picked DTrace as one example, there's other examples of course too (including Desktop). From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 14:01:17 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:01:17 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070205220117.GN16635@eng.sun.com> * Glynn Foster [2007-02-05 13:42]: > Hey, > > Stephen Hahn wrote: > > * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: > >> Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. > >> > >> I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I > >> can to over the past 20 months. > > > > There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core > > Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a > > specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core > > Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then > > approach one or more OGB members with your case. > > Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his > reactions to it [http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/26012007]. As I see > it, it's not a fair reflection of the people involved in the community > at all - in most cases, it's the result of some pretty bad feedback > from the various communities, with not a lot of thought going into the > list and its consequences [1] > > Quite what can be done at this stage, I have no idea. There is no limit on how persuasive a participant can be; it is quite conceivable that an eloquent opponent could argue the 237 Core Contributors to vote against Question 1. I am not sure what we would do in that scenario, but it would certainly result in a reset to the development of a Constitution. > [1] And in some ways it's absolutely correct eg. DTrace - Bryan, Adam, > Mike and Brendan were all *heavily* responsible for the code they > wrote and they have the right to feel proud of that. On the other > hand, it's not terribly encouraging to others trying to get more > involved. I picked DTrace as one example, there's other examples of > course too (including Desktop). I continue to believe that a legitimate course of action is for folks who feel disenfranchised to take it up with one or more Community Groups, or with the OGB. If a particular Community Group isn't (or its Core Contributors aren't) meeting the expected responsibilities, then the Board needs to be alerted: it can both make Core Contributor grants (to allow the election broader representation) and explore corrective options for a specific Community Group with problems. That's always been my picture of government: complain, contact your representative, complain again. Unheard problems don't get addressed. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From ian at ianshome.com Mon Feb 5 14:06:18 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 11:06:18 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> Message-ID: <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> Glynn Foster wrote: >Hey, > >Stephen Hahn wrote: > > >>* Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: >> >> >>>Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. >>> >>>I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I >>>can to over the past 20 months. >>> >>> >> There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core >> Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a >> specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core >> Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then >> approach one or more OGB members with your case. >> >> > >Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his reactions to >it [http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/26012007]. As I see it, it's not a fair >reflection of the people involved in the community at all - in most cases, it's >the result of some pretty bad feedback from the various communities, with not a >lot of thought going into the list and its consequences [1] > >Quite what can be done at this stage, I have no idea. > > > Thanks Glynn, I wish I'd seen your blog earlier. While I'm unable to offer an alternative proposition at this stage, I think this cause disenfranchises active members of the community who, like me, are unable though personal circumstances to devote the time and effort required to becoming a core contributor. It will be seen by the world at large as yet another means of keeping non-Sun people out of the project governance. I fear another storm brewing on discuss when this is announced. Ian From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 14:07:26 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:07:26 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> Message-ID: <45C7AA9E.4070902@Sun.Com> Glynn Foster wrote: > Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his reactions You make some good points. The ARC Community has been very active recently, at least judging by the email flying around. Lets use it as an example: In terms of this voting list, who is the ARC community? My initial take was pretty simple The current PSARC members (core) and interns/licensees (contributers) plus myself :-) but, in light of Glynn and Ian's comments, this no longer seems sufficient. As I look deeper, I find several sources I missed: The list of community leaders on the website (chosen to facilitate website maintenance rather than make architectural decisions) The list of community observers on the website The list of people contributing to the email discussions on the opensolaris-arc and arc-discuss aliases. The list of project team leads for the cases that were reviewed by PSARC that went into Nevada. On the other hand, the ARC community isn't just another community. In theory, the ARC community should really be (by definition) the superset of all the other community's core members - after all, the goal is to have *us* reviewing *our* stuff - and, if you are not active somewhere else, why should you have standing/voice/vote here? So, how should I select who is on the magic ARC community list? What should we be telling othere? How do we know when we are done? What is magic about /me that I am the one who gets to decide these things? -John From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Mon Feb 5 14:27:20 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:27:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> Message-ID: <45C7AF48.9020200@tadpole.com> Ian Collins wrote: > Glynn Foster wrote: > > >> Hey, >> >> Stephen Hahn wrote: >> >> >> >>> * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. >>>> >>>> I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I >>>> can to over the past 20 months. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core >>> Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a >>> specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core >>> Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then >>> approach one or more OGB members with your case. >>> >>> >>> >> Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his reactions to >> it [http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/26012007]. As I see it, it's not a fair >> reflection of the people involved in the community at all - in most cases, it's >> the result of some pretty bad feedback from the various communities, with not a >> lot of thought going into the list and its consequences [1] >> >> Quite what can be done at this stage, I have no idea. >> >> >> >> > Thanks Glynn, I wish I'd seen your blog earlier. > > While I'm unable to offer an alternative proposition at this stage, I > think this cause disenfranchises active members of the community who, > like me, are unable though personal circumstances to devote the time and > effort required to becoming a core contributor. It will be seen by the > world at large as yet another means of keeping non-Sun people out of the > project governance. > > I fear another storm brewing on discuss when this is announced. > I agree. There is another problem, as well. I suspect some people are not heavily involved with any single group, yet contribute substantially towards the overall development of Solaris. For example, I have contributed a variety of things to Solaris over the years, and most recently for OpenSolaris have the following projects brewing: 1) afe network driver integration (possibly also mxfe), and updates to support Nemo 2) grand-unification effort for serial drivers (back-burnered ATM, but not forgotten) 3) crypto contributions pending (e.g. RNG support for Padlock, that I hope to post this week) 4) various bits to improve platform support for Tadpole hardware 5) possibly going forward improvements to in-kernel framebuffers (e.g. I wrote NetBSD radeonfb, which I'd like to port to OpenSolaris) 6) wifi enhancements -- I've got fixes for the PCI prism driver, and other bits 7) improvements for PS/2 keyboards 8) improvements for touchpads 9) various other minor patches (e.g. rge patch for more NIC support, xargs, id, and kstat fixes) 10) forthcoming improvements for power management on SPARC platforms (I hope) Despite all this, no one group recognizes my contribution as qualifying for Core Contributor. (The laptop community might recognize me as a Contributor, but the current list proposed does not go beyond that.) I somehow doubt that I'm the only individual that falls "through the cracks" in the current classification process. -- Garrett > Ian > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org > -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From al at logical-approach.com Mon Feb 5 14:46:29 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 16:46:29 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C7AF48.9020200@tadpole.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> <45C7AF48.9020200@tadpole.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Ian Collins wrote: > > Glynn Foster wrote: > > > > > >> Hey, > >> > >> Stephen Hahn wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. > >>>> > >>>> I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I > >>>> can to over the past 20 months. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core > >>> Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a > >>> specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core > >>> Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then > >>> approach one or more OGB members with your case. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his reactions to > >> it [http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/26012007]. As I see it, it's not a fair > >> reflection of the people involved in the community at all - in most cases, it's > >> the result of some pretty bad feedback from the various communities, with not a > >> lot of thought going into the list and its consequences [1] > >> > >> Quite what can be done at this stage, I have no idea. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Thanks Glynn, I wish I'd seen your blog earlier. > > > > While I'm unable to offer an alternative proposition at this stage, I > > think this cause disenfranchises active members of the community who, > > like me, are unable though personal circumstances to devote the time and > > effort required to becoming a core contributor. It will be seen by the > > world at large as yet another means of keeping non-Sun people out of the > > project governance. > > > > I fear another storm brewing on discuss when this is announced. > > > > I agree. > > There is another problem, as well. I suspect some people are not > heavily involved with any single group, yet contribute substantially > towards the overall development of Solaris. > > For example, I have contributed a variety of things to Solaris over the > years, and most recently for OpenSolaris have the following projects > brewing: > > 1) afe network driver integration (possibly also mxfe), and updates to > support Nemo > 2) grand-unification effort for serial drivers (back-burnered ATM, but > not forgotten) > 3) crypto contributions pending (e.g. RNG support for Padlock, that I > hope to post this week) > 4) various bits to improve platform support for Tadpole hardware > 5) possibly going forward improvements to in-kernel framebuffers (e.g. I > wrote NetBSD radeonfb, which I'd like to port to OpenSolaris) > 6) wifi enhancements -- I've got fixes for the PCI prism driver, and > other bits > 7) improvements for PS/2 keyboards > 8) improvements for touchpads > 9) various other minor patches (e.g. rge patch for more NIC support, > xargs, id, and kstat fixes) > 10) forthcoming improvements for power management on SPARC platforms (I > hope) > > Despite all this, no one group recognizes my contribution as qualifying > for Core Contributor. (The laptop community might recognize me as a > Contributor, but the current list proposed does not go beyond that.) > > I somehow doubt that I'm the only individual that falls "through the > cracks" in the current classification process. Then simply reformat this email and post it to cab-discuss with an appropriate Subject: line (request to be recognized as a core contributor) and it'll be acted upon. Any CAB/OBG member can approve the request and I can tell you that yours and Ians are a no-brainer! :) But we must apply some form of organized process to these requests and generate an "audit trail" of sorts, so that a persons right to vote can be ascertained if there was, for example, a dispute over the election process or results. I would request that subject line be adhered to as strictly as possible - since many OpenSolaris participants are already drowning in a sea of email! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Mon Feb 5 15:14:09 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 15:14:09 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] request to be recognized as a core contributor Message-ID: <45C7BA41.6050103@tadpole.com> Per Al Hopper's suggestion: I have contributed a variety of things to Solaris over the years, and most recently for OpenSolaris have the following projects brewing: 1) afe network driver integration (possibly also mxfe), and updates to support Nemo 2) grand-unification effort for serial drivers (back-burnered ATM, but not forgotten) 3) crypto contributions pending (e.g. RNG support for Padlock, that I hope to post this week) 4) various bits to improve platform support for Tadpole hardware 5) possibly going forward improvements to in-kernel framebuffers (e.g. I wrote NetBSD radeonfb, which I'd like to port to OpenSolaris) 6) wifi enhancements -- I've got fixes for the PCI prism driver, and other bits 7) improvements for PS/2 keyboards 8) improvements for touchpads 9) various other minor patches (e.g. rge patch for more NIC support, xargs, id, and kstat fixes) 10) forthcoming improvements for power management on SPARC platforms (I hope) Despite all this, no one group recognizes my contribution as qualifying for Core Contributor. (The laptop community might recognize me as a Contributor, but the current list proposed does not go beyond that.) -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From ian at ianshome.com Mon Feb 5 15:18:16 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 12:18:16 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] request to be recognised as a core contributor Message-ID: <45C7BB38.5070007@ianshome.com> Gents, Following Al's suggestion, I'd like to be recognised as a core contributor to Open Solaris. While I can not produce a list of tangible code contributions, I believe I have contributed to the project through my contributions to various discussion forums. Ian From al at logical-approach.com Mon Feb 5 15:31:46 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 17:31:46 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] request to be recognized as a core contributor In-Reply-To: <45C7BA41.6050103@tadpole.com> References: <45C7BA41.6050103@tadpole.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Per Al Hopper's suggestion: > > I have contributed a variety of things to Solaris over the > years, and most recently for OpenSolaris have the following projects > brewing: > > 1) afe network driver integration (possibly also mxfe), and updates to support Nemo > 2) grand-unification effort for serial drivers (back-burnered ATM, but not forgotten) > 3) crypto contributions pending (e.g. RNG support for Padlock, that I hope to post this week) > 4) various bits to improve platform support for Tadpole hardware > 5) possibly going forward improvements to in-kernel framebuffers (e.g. I wrote NetBSD radeonfb, which I'd like to port to OpenSolaris) > 6) wifi enhancements -- I've got fixes for the PCI prism driver, and other bits > 7) improvements for PS/2 keyboards > 8) improvements for touchpads > 9) various other minor patches (e.g. rge patch for more NIC support, xargs, id, and kstat fixes) > 10) forthcoming improvements for power management on SPARC platforms (I hope) > > Despite all this, no one group recognizes my contribution as qualifying > for Core Contributor. (The laptop community might recognize me as a > Contributor, but the current list proposed does not go beyond that.) The CAB/OGB is pleased to recognize the sustained participation and contribution of Garrett D'Amore and have him designated as an OpenSolaris Core Contributor - with all the privilidges that this title confers. Thanks Garrett - the Project is indeed enriched by your participation and I hope that you will continue active participation into the future. PS: Stephen - Can you please handle the mechanics of adding garrett_damore to your database. TIA. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From al at logical-approach.com Mon Feb 5 15:33:33 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 17:33:33 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] request to be recognised as a core contributor In-Reply-To: <45C7BB38.5070007@ianshome.com> References: <45C7BB38.5070007@ianshome.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Ian Collins wrote: > Gents, > > Following Al's suggestion, I'd like to be recognised as a core > contributor to Open Solaris. > > While I can not produce a list of tangible code contributions, I believe > I have contributed to the project through my contributions to various > discussion forums. The CAB/OGB is pleased to recognize the sustained participation and contribution of Ian Collins and have him designated as an OpenSolaris Core Contributor - with all the privilidges that this title confers. Thanks Ian - the Project is indeed enriched by your participation and I hope that you will continue active participation into the future. PS: Stephen - Can you please handle the mechanics of adding Ian to your database. TIA. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From bill at rushmores.net Mon Feb 5 17:34:54 2007 From: bill at rushmores.net (Bill Rushmore) Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 20:34:54 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be Recognized as a Core Contributor Message-ID: <45C7DB3E.3060309@rushmores.net> I would like to be considered to be recognized as a core contributor. My list of major contributions to the OpenSolaris project: 1. Contributed the article "Installing OpenSolaris on VMware" 2. One of the leaders of the OpenSolaris Content Project 3. One of the leaders of the Chime Visualization Tool for DTrace But more importantly, I want to be considered a core contributor because I have been interested and involved here for over a year and half now and have strong desire to see the community succeed. Bill rushmores.net From al at logical-approach.com Mon Feb 5 17:57:36 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 19:57:36 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be Recognized as a Core Contributor In-Reply-To: <45C7DB3E.3060309@rushmores.net> References: <45C7DB3E.3060309@rushmores.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Bill Rushmore wrote: > I would like to be considered to be recognized as a core contributor. > My list of major contributions to the OpenSolaris project: > > 1. Contributed the article "Installing OpenSolaris on VMware" > 2. One of the leaders of the OpenSolaris Content Project > 3. One of the leaders of the Chime Visualization Tool for DTrace > > > But more importantly, I want to be considered a core contributor because > I have been interested and involved here for over a year and half now > and have strong desire to see the community succeed. The CAB/OGB is pleased to recognize the sustained participation and contribution of Bill Rushmore and have him designated as an OpenSolaris Core Contributor - with all the privilidges that this title confers. Thanks Bill - the Project is indeed enriched by your participation and your sustained contributions are easily recognized. A year and a half is a valuable committment ... to any endeavor. Thanks and I look forward to seeing your name on many more OpenSolaris related posts going forward. PS: Stephen - Can you please handle the mechanics of adding bill at rushmores.net to your database. TIA. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 17:57:49 2007 From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 10:57:49 +0900 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be Recognized as a Core Contributor In-Reply-To: <45C7DB3E.3060309@rushmores.net> References: <45C7DB3E.3060309@rushmores.net> Message-ID: <45C7E09D.5000505@Sun.COM> Bill Rushmore wrote On 02/06/07 10:34,: > I would like to be considered to be recognized as a core contributor. > My list of major contributions to the OpenSolaris project: > > 1. Contributed the article "Installing OpenSolaris on VMware" > 2. One of the leaders of the OpenSolaris Content Project Huge apologies, Bill. I'm sure the DTrace leads can put your name in as well but if not, here's mine: content core brushmor Bill Rushmore wrote peer-reviewed article for site Jim G. > 3. One of the leaders of the Chime Visualization Tool for DTrace > > > But more importantly, I want to be considered a core contributor because > I have been interested and involved here for over a year and half now > and have strong desire to see the community succeed. > Bill > rushmores.net From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 20:31:04 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 20:31:04 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be Recognized as a Core Contributor In-Reply-To: <45C7E09D.5000505@Sun.COM> References: <45C7DB3E.3060309@rushmores.net> <45C7E09D.5000505@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <20070206043103.GA25896@eng.sun.com> * Jim Grisanzio [2007-02-05 17:57]: > > > Bill Rushmore wrote On 02/06/07 10:34,: > >I would like to be considered to be recognized as a core contributor. > >My list of major contributions to the OpenSolaris project: > > > >1. Contributed the article "Installing OpenSolaris on VMware" > >2. One of the leaders of the OpenSolaris Content Project > > Huge apologies, Bill. I'm sure the DTrace leads can put your name in as > well but if not, here's mine: > > content core brushmor Bill Rushmore wrote peer-reviewed article for site (The content project is not a community group.) I've added each of the three accounts as Core Contributors to the CAB/OGB community group. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From justin at erenkrantz.com Mon Feb 5 21:55:29 2007 From: justin at erenkrantz.com (Justin Erenkrantz) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 21:55:29 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: References: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <5c902b9e0702052155m24100c00j6feea1d2894a4c08@mail.gmail.com> On 2/1/07, Al Hopper wrote: > Hi Michelle! If you're concerned about the voting mechanism itself, I > don't think that we need to run an actual vote to confirm whether it works > - since it's based on the same code/facility used by Apache.Org. A simple > dummy test conducted by a selected group of test voters will confirm if > the software works as intended. FWIW, the ASF voter tool (originally written by Roy; which leads me to believe that is what you are referring to) requires SSH logins to cast votes. So, uh, I don't know how that'd work for OpenSolaris - unless there's a box that all eligible voters have an SSH account on. BTW, it's fairly easy to do dry run ballots with all voters with the ASF tool - we do that every time before a 'real' vote is conducted. -- justin From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 5 22:17:19 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 22:17:19 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <5c902b9e0702052155m24100c00j6feea1d2894a4c08@mail.gmail.com> References: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> <5c902b9e0702052155m24100c00j6feea1d2894a4c08@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070206061719.GA25978@eng.sun.com> * Justin Erenkrantz [2007-02-05 21:55]: > On 2/1/07, Al Hopper wrote: > >Hi Michelle! If you're concerned about the voting mechanism itself, I > >don't think that we need to run an actual vote to confirm whether it works > >- since it's based on the same code/facility used by Apache.Org. A simple > >dummy test conducted by a selected group of test voters will confirm if > >the software works as intended. > > FWIW, the ASF voter tool (originally written by Roy; which leads me to > believe that is what you are referring to) requires SSH logins to cast > votes. So, uh, I don't know how that'd work for OpenSolaris - unless > there's a box that all eligible voters have an SSH account on. BTW, > it's fairly easy to do dry run ballots with all voters with the ASF > tool - we do that every time before a 'real' vote is conducted. -- The repository hosting facility uses SSH logins, so we have an increasing collection of SSH public keys. We're in the process of adding a server to host the voting software--well, a zone anyways. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 22:43:22 2007 From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:43:22 +0900 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be Recognized as a Core Contributor In-Reply-To: <20070206043103.GA25896@eng.sun.com> References: <45C7DB3E.3060309@rushmores.net> <45C7E09D.5000505@Sun.COM> <20070206043103.GA25896@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C8238A.3060905@Sun.COM> Stephen Hahn wrote On 02/06/07 13:31,: > * Jim Grisanzio [2007-02-05 17:57]: > >> >>Bill Rushmore wrote On 02/06/07 10:34,: >> >>>I would like to be considered to be recognized as a core contributor. >>>My list of major contributions to the OpenSolaris project: >>> >>>1. Contributed the article "Installing OpenSolaris on VMware" >>>2. One of the leaders of the OpenSolaris Content Project >> >>Huge apologies, Bill. I'm sure the DTrace leads can put your name in as >>well but if not, here's mine: >> >>content core brushmor Bill Rushmore wrote peer-reviewed article for site > > > (The content project is not a community group.) > > I've added each of the three accounts as Core Contributors to the > CAB/OGB community group. That's right. Sorry. I knew that. :) Jim From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM Mon Feb 5 23:59:15 2007 From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:59:15 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] request to be recognized as a core contributor In-Reply-To: <45C7BA41.6050103@tadpole.com> References: <45C7BA41.6050103@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <200702060759.l167xFOb018039@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> >Per Al Hopper's suggestion: > >I have contributed a variety of things to Solaris over the >years, and most recently for OpenSolaris have the following projects >brewing: +1 (sorry for not making you core right away) Casper From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Tue Feb 6 14:12:56 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 11:12:56 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <20070205183147.GA16635@eng.sun.com> References: <45BFDD83.9010800@sun.com> <45C05378.2060009@sun.com> <20070205183147.GA16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C8FD68.1060800@sun.com> Hey Stephen, I've tried making some changes that you suggested, and put it onto the wiki - I'd be more than happy people editing it as appropriate. http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolarisElectionDraft Glynn Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Glynn Foster [2007-01-31 00:30]: > > Thanks for writing this up. > >> The OpenSolaris Governing Board is pleased to announce the start of >> the annual elections to elect a governing board for 2007, under the >> terms and conditions as set out in the OpenSolaris constitution. >> >> Who can vote? >> >> To be eligible to vote, you must be a current member of the OpenSolaris >> community, as defined in the constitution, and be present on the current >> voting list as prepared by the Secretary no more than 10 days before the >> the start of the voting period for the elections. >> >> If you are not a member, you may either need to apply for membership, or >> renew an expired membership and be present on the voting list no less than >> 3 days prior to the start of the voting period for the elections. > > I would suggest capitalizing Member, Constitution, etc. I think a > link to the draft Constitution on genunix.org is needed, at least as a > footnote. Probably also an excuse about the bootstrap nature of this > election. > >> Being a candidate >> >> Candidates for election to the OpenSolaris Governing Board must be >> nominated by a current member, or themselves providing they are a >> member, and be registered as an OpenSolaris participant. All >> candidates should send an e-mail to >> opensolaris-announce at opensolaris.org with your name, e-mail address, >> corporate affiliation (if any), along with a description of why you'd >> like to serve. >> >> If you are not a member and would like to stand for the election, you >> must first apply for membership and be accepted to be eligible to run. > > I think the ordering here is backwards: any Participant can be > nominated, but must be nominated by a Member. > >> The OpenSolaris Governing Board shall consist of 3 and a maximum of 7 >> people elected by the members of the community. You may vote for up to >> 7 people. > > I think we need to pick a specific number of seats, unless we're > proposing something new. Seven was the result of discussions that led > to the current draft. > > Well, the dates below will all have to slip now. > >> Timeline >> (all deadlines are 23:59 UTC/18:59 EST) >> >> February 2007 >> S M Tu W Th F S >> (1) 2 3 Candidate nominations open >> 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> (11)(12)13 14 15 16 17 Candidate nominations close (11th) >> Campaigning begins (12th) >> 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 >> 25 (26)27(28) Voting list finalized (26th) >> Campaigning finishes (28th) >> >> March 2007 >> S M Tu W Th F S >> (1) 2 3 Elections begin >> 4 5 6 7 (8)(9)10 Elections finish (8th) >> Election results announced (9th) >> 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >> 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 >> 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 > > I guess we can open on (8) February, so a one week slip. > > - Stephen > From fielding at gbiv.com Tue Feb 6 14:33:28 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 14:33:28 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominations? In-Reply-To: <20070206061719.GA25978@eng.sun.com> References: <200702010105.l1115kWh256138@jurassic.eng.sun.com> <5c902b9e0702052155m24100c00j6feea1d2894a4c08@mail.gmail.com> <20070206061719.GA25978@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <3FF2326D-FABD-4BAA-9205-02BA340164C8@gbiv.com> On Feb 5, 2007, at 10:17 PM, Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Justin Erenkrantz [2007-02-05 21:55]: >> On 2/1/07, Al Hopper wrote: >>> Hi Michelle! If you're concerned about the voting mechanism >>> itself, I >>> don't think that we need to run an actual vote to confirm whether >>> it works >>> - since it's based on the same code/facility used by Apache.Org. >>> A simple >>> dummy test conducted by a selected group of test voters will >>> confirm if >>> the software works as intended. >> >> FWIW, the ASF voter tool (originally written by Roy; which leads >> me to >> believe that is what you are referring to) requires SSH logins to >> cast >> votes. So, uh, I don't know how that'd work for OpenSolaris - unless >> there's a box that all eligible voters have an SSH account on. BTW, >> it's fairly easy to do dry run ballots with all voters with the ASF >> tool - we do that every time before a 'real' vote is conducted. -- > > The repository hosting facility uses SSH logins, so we have an > increasing collection of SSH public keys. We're in the process of > adding a server to host the voting software--well, a zone anyways. Yes, though I provided the tool more as an example of how the election is run, rather than an expectation that opensolaris would use the same SSH interface. Note that the Apache tool doesn't depend on SSH for authentication. The only "auth" it uses is the shared key that is given to each voter in combination with email alerts that go out each time that key is used. We could just as easily use a web front end as the ballot and merely paste the key into a form. The reason I did not do that for Apache is because we are Web server experts, and it is far more tempting for us to watch the Web server at the wrong time than it is to watch the shell activity and SMTP. The reverse may be true for OpenSolaris. BTW, it is important that the STV ballot be randomized per ballot, not randomized once and sent to everyone in the same order. No matter how hard we tried to educate folks, people would still read the list from top to bottom and enter preferences in the order read. Also, the ballot should repeat that the voter should order the candidates by preference of those they would like in office and not include any candidate they don't want in office. Most of that is auto-generated by the tools. For example, I have included below the ballot that I received for last year's election of the ASF board (minus the monitor email addresses). ....Roy ================================================ Hello Apache members, A call for votes has been declared for the following: Issue: members-20060613-board Voting style: single transferable vote for 9 slots The following candidates have been nominated for the nine available positions of Director within the Board of Directors of The Apache Software Foundation, as defined by Article V of the ASF Bylaws. In order to maximize effective representation of all members of the ASF, the 2002-2003 Board of Directors has resolved that such an election will be decided according to the Single Transferable Vote (STV) election process, as described below. PLEASE read the STV links below, but in general, the concept is that you can vote for as many or as few candidates as you wish, but you MUST list them in your order of preference. The person that you most want to see on the board should be listed first, followed the 2nd most wanted person, etc... There are 9 slots available; you should select all the people you want to be on the board, in the order in which you prefer them. You can select less than 9 people, and you can also select more than 9 people. More information can be found at: foundation:/voter Nominations: label: Name: [h] Cliff Schmidt [a] Justin Erenkrantz [g] William A. Rowe Jr [b] Henri Yandell [f] Sander Striker [d] Dirk-Willem van Gulik [e] Jim Jagielski [c] Greg Stein [k] Brian Fitzpatrick [i] Ken Coar [j] Ian Holsman [m] Geir Magnusson Jr. [l] Sam Ruby Position statements can be found in SVN: foundation/Meetings/20060613/board_ballot_2006_06.txt Voting closes at June 15, 2006 @ 14:00 UTC.The ASF Members Meeting is scheduled to reconvene at June 15, 2006 @ 16:00 UTC (see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html? year=2006&month=6&day=15&hour=16&min=0&sec=0) = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Your voting key for this issue: 278afe53739cf8b14cfc3d1af71a9059 In order to vote, use ssh to login to people.apache.org and then run /home/voter/bin/vote members-20060613-board \ 278afe53739cf8b14cfc3d1af71a9059 "vote" where "vote" must be replaced by a single word containing the concatenated labels of candidates in the order that you wish them to be selected. In other words, if you want to vote for the candidates labeled [x], [s], and [p], in that order, then your vote should be "xsp". This election will be decided according to the Single Transferable Vote rules described at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BoardElectionVoteCounting http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/votingsystems/stvi.htm http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/stvrules/index.htm for an election with 9 open slots. You have one vote. Use your vote by entering the label of your first preference candidate followed by, if desired, the label of your second preference candidate, and so on until you are indifferent about the remaining candidates. The sequence of your preferences is crucial. You should continue to express preferences only as long as you are able to place successive candidates in order. A later preference is considered only if an earlier preference has a surplus above the quota required for election, or is excluded because of insufficient support. Under no circumstances will a later preference count against an earlier preference. You may list as many candidates as you wish, but no more than once per vote (e.g., "xsxp" would be rejected). The voter code will not attempt to verify that the labels chosen are within the range of candidates. If for some reason you are unable to use ssh to access people.apache.org, then you can vote by proxy: simply send your voting key to some person with ssh access that you trust, preferably with instructions on how you wish them to place your vote. For verification purposes, you will be receiving an e-mail notification each time your voting key is used. Repeat votes will be considered a complete replacement of your prior vote. Your vote will be recorded in a tally file and sent to the vote monitors along with a different unique key, minimizing the chance that the contents of your vote will be accidentally seen by someone else while associated to you. That is why the verification e-mail will only state that you have voted, rather than including how you voted. If you have any problems or questions, send a reply to the vote monitors for this issue: ... From roland.mainz at nrubsig.org Tue Feb 6 15:10:31 2007 From: roland.mainz at nrubsig.org (Roland Mainz) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:10:31 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognized as a core contributor... Message-ID: <45C90AE7.3255E34D@nrubsig.org> Hi! ---- Following Al's suggestion, I'd like to be recognised as a core contributor to OpenSolaris. My list of contributions to the OpenSolaris project: 1. Contributed minor changes to "isaexec" (and more changes are queued in the request-sponsor list) 2. One of the leaders of the ksh93-integration project (and the future followup "shell" project). But more importantly, I would like to be considered a core contributor because I have strong desire to see the community succeed... :-) ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM Tue Feb 6 15:14:28 2007 From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:14:28 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognized as a core contributor... In-Reply-To: <45C90AE7.3255E34D@nrubsig.org> References: <45C90AE7.3255E34D@nrubsig.org> Message-ID: <200702062314.l16NESGJ010162@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> > >Hi! > >---- > >Following Al's suggestion, I'd like to be recognised as a core >contributor to OpenSolaris. > >My list of contributions to the OpenSolaris project: > >1. Contributed minor changes to "isaexec" (and more changes are queued >in the request-sponsor list) >2. One of the leaders of the ksh93-integration project (and the future >followup "shell" project). > >But more importantly, I would like to be considered a core contributor >because I have strong desire to see the community succeed... :-) Well, Roland, I don't know (why you'd even have to ask:-) +1 (but I'm sure all the evil anti ksh93 Sun folks will want to -1 this :-) Casper From richlowe at richlowe.net Tue Feb 6 15:24:02 2007 From: richlowe at richlowe.net (Richard Lowe) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:24:02 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> <45C7AF48.9020200@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45C90E12.5030304@richlowe.net> Al Hopper wrote: > On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > >> Ian Collins wrote: >>> Glynn Foster wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hey, >>>> >>>> Stephen Hahn wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. >>>>>> >>>>>> I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as much as I >>>>>> can to over the past 20 months. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core >>>>> Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a >>>>> specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core >>>>> Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then >>>>> approach one or more OGB members with your case. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his reactions to >>>> it [http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/26012007]. As I see it, it's not a fair >>>> reflection of the people involved in the community at all - in most cases, it's >>>> the result of some pretty bad feedback from the various communities, with not a >>>> lot of thought going into the list and its consequences [1] >>>> >>>> Quite what can be done at this stage, I have no idea. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Thanks Glynn, I wish I'd seen your blog earlier. >>> >>> While I'm unable to offer an alternative proposition at this stage, I >>> think this cause disenfranchises active members of the community who, >>> like me, are unable though personal circumstances to devote the time and >>> effort required to becoming a core contributor. It will be seen by the >>> world at large as yet another means of keeping non-Sun people out of the >>> project governance. >>> >>> I fear another storm brewing on discuss when this is announced. >>> >> I agree. >> >> There is another problem, as well. I suspect some people are not >> heavily involved with any single group, yet contribute substantially >> towards the overall development of Solaris. >> >> For example, I have contributed a variety of things to Solaris over the >> years, and most recently for OpenSolaris have the following projects >> brewing: >> >> 1) afe network driver integration (possibly also mxfe), and updates to >> support Nemo >> 2) grand-unification effort for serial drivers (back-burnered ATM, but >> not forgotten) >> 3) crypto contributions pending (e.g. RNG support for Padlock, that I >> hope to post this week) >> 4) various bits to improve platform support for Tadpole hardware >> 5) possibly going forward improvements to in-kernel framebuffers (e.g. I >> wrote NetBSD radeonfb, which I'd like to port to OpenSolaris) >> 6) wifi enhancements -- I've got fixes for the PCI prism driver, and >> other bits >> 7) improvements for PS/2 keyboards >> 8) improvements for touchpads >> 9) various other minor patches (e.g. rge patch for more NIC support, >> xargs, id, and kstat fixes) >> 10) forthcoming improvements for power management on SPARC platforms (I >> hope) >> >> Despite all this, no one group recognizes my contribution as qualifying >> for Core Contributor. (The laptop community might recognize me as a >> Contributor, but the current list proposed does not go beyond that.) >> >> I somehow doubt that I'm the only individual that falls "through the >> cracks" in the current classification process. > > Then simply reformat this email and post it to cab-discuss with an > appropriate Subject: line (request to be recognized as a core contributor) > and it'll be acted upon. Any CAB/OBG member can approve the request and I > can tell you that yours and Ians are a no-brainer! :) > How about, rather than doing this for everyone who happens to notice, someone lean on the communities (again) to get the lists drawn up properly? -- Rich From Bonnie.Corwin at Sun.COM Tue Feb 6 15:32:01 2007 From: Bonnie.Corwin at Sun.COM (Bonnie Corwin) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:32:01 -0700 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C90E12.5030304@richlowe.net> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> <45C7AF48.9020200@tadpole.com> <45C90E12.5030304@richlowe.net> Message-ID: <45C90FF1.40205@Sun.COM> Richard Lowe wrote: > Al Hopper wrote: > >> On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> >>> Ian Collins wrote: >>> >>>> Glynn Foster wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hey, >>>>> >>>>> Stephen Hahn wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> * Ian Collins [2007-02-05 11:43]: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, I must have missed that in all the noise. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I just felt excluded from something I've been contributing as >>>>>>> much as I >>>>>>> can to over the past 20 months. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> There are numerous Community Groups out there able to nominate Core >>>>>> Contributors, including the OGB/CAB. If your contributions are in a >>>>>> specific area, I would start a discussion with the existing Core >>>>>> Contributors there; if you've mostly been in the main forums, then >>>>>> approach one or more OGB members with your case. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Sorry all, but I have to agree with Ian, and I can understand his >>>>> reactions to >>>>> it [http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/26012007]. As I see it, it's >>>>> not a fair >>>>> reflection of the people involved in the community at all - in most >>>>> cases, it's >>>>> the result of some pretty bad feedback from the various >>>>> communities, with not a >>>>> lot of thought going into the list and its consequences [1] >>>>> >>>>> Quite what can be done at this stage, I have no idea. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Thanks Glynn, I wish I'd seen your blog earlier. >>>> >>>> While I'm unable to offer an alternative proposition at this stage, I >>>> think this cause disenfranchises active members of the community who, >>>> like me, are unable though personal circumstances to devote the time >>>> and >>>> effort required to becoming a core contributor. It will be seen by the >>>> world at large as yet another means of keeping non-Sun people out of >>>> the >>>> project governance. >>>> >>>> I fear another storm brewing on discuss when this is announced. >>>> >>> I agree. >>> >>> There is another problem, as well. I suspect some people are not >>> heavily involved with any single group, yet contribute substantially >>> towards the overall development of Solaris. >>> >>> For example, I have contributed a variety of things to Solaris over the >>> years, and most recently for OpenSolaris have the following projects >>> brewing: >>> >>> 1) afe network driver integration (possibly also mxfe), and updates to >>> support Nemo >>> 2) grand-unification effort for serial drivers (back-burnered ATM, but >>> not forgotten) >>> 3) crypto contributions pending (e.g. RNG support for Padlock, that I >>> hope to post this week) >>> 4) various bits to improve platform support for Tadpole hardware >>> 5) possibly going forward improvements to in-kernel framebuffers (e.g. I >>> wrote NetBSD radeonfb, which I'd like to port to OpenSolaris) >>> 6) wifi enhancements -- I've got fixes for the PCI prism driver, and >>> other bits >>> 7) improvements for PS/2 keyboards >>> 8) improvements for touchpads >>> 9) various other minor patches (e.g. rge patch for more NIC support, >>> xargs, id, and kstat fixes) >>> 10) forthcoming improvements for power management on SPARC platforms (I >>> hope) >>> >>> Despite all this, no one group recognizes my contribution as qualifying >>> for Core Contributor. (The laptop community might recognize me as a >>> Contributor, but the current list proposed does not go beyond that.) >>> >>> I somehow doubt that I'm the only individual that falls "through the >>> cracks" in the current classification process. >> >> >> Then simply reformat this email and post it to cab-discuss with an >> appropriate Subject: line (request to be recognized as a core >> contributor) >> and it'll be acted upon. Any CAB/OBG member can approve the request >> and I >> can tell you that yours and Ians are a no-brainer! :) >> > > How about, rather than doing this for everyone who happens to notice, > someone lean on the communities (again) to get the lists drawn up properly? I fear I have missed something basic so apologies up front if these are stupid questions. But exactly who draws up each community list using what criteria? Many communities have multiple leaders. Which leader is expected to submit a list? And are those people working from a set of criteria? And how are projects handled? Most are affiliated with a community - is it the community leader's job to make sure the appropriate people on each affiliated project are accounted for (I was surprised to see Roland's email to the CAB - I would have expected him to show up on a community list that is interested in the ksh93 project)? I also wonder if the current list should be posted to opensolaris-discuss with instructions for who to contact if people think they are missing from a list - I believe it's only been posted on cab-discuss which has a smaller audience. Bonnie > > -- Rich > > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From al at logical-approach.com Tue Feb 6 15:36:13 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 17:36:13 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call Message-ID: I'd like to schedule a CAB conf call for tomorrow (Wed, Feb 7th) at the usual time (12:00 noon Pacific). Items on the agenda (please add to this list): a) CAB/OGB election, status, action items, timing etc. b) status/opinions on the draft for a GPLv3/dual-licensing leadership position statement from the CAB (draft sent to the private aliases). c) why the CAB/OGB has failed to take a leadership position with the OpenSolaris community to date. I look forward to talking with you all tomorrow. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From roland.mainz at nrubsig.org Tue Feb 6 15:37:41 2007 From: roland.mainz at nrubsig.org (Roland Mainz) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:37:41 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognized as a core contributor... References: <45C90AE7.3255E34D@nrubsig.org> <200702062314.l16NESGJ010162@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> Message-ID: <45C91145.22161F44@nrubsig.org> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > >Following Al's suggestion, I'd like to be recognised as a core > >contributor to OpenSolaris. > > > >My list of contributions to the OpenSolaris project: > > > >1. Contributed minor changes to "isaexec" (and more changes are queued > >in the request-sponsor list) > >2. One of the leaders of the ksh93-integration project (and the future > >followup "shell" project). > > > >But more importantly, I would like to be considered a core contributor > >because I have strong desire to see the community succeed... :-) > > Well, Roland, I don't know (why you'd even have to ask:-) > > +1 Thanks! :-) > (but I'm sure all the evil anti ksh93 Sun folks will want to > -1 this :-) Well, part of the problem is that noone explained the complexity of what we're doing... and being the "pathfinder" doesn't make it much easier either... ;-( ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) From roland.mainz at nrubsig.org Tue Feb 6 15:46:24 2007 From: roland.mainz at nrubsig.org (Roland Mainz) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:46:24 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> <45C7AF48.9020200@tadpole.com> <45C90E12.5030304@richlowe.net> <45C90FF1.40205@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <45C91350.B113B3AE@nrubsig.org> Bonnie Corwin wrote: > Richard Lowe wrote: > > Al Hopper wrote: [snip] > But exactly who draws up each community list using what criteria? Many > communities have multiple leaders. Which leader is expected to submit a > list? And are those people working from a set of criteria? And how are > projects handled? Most are affiliated with a community - is it the > community leader's job to make sure the appropriate people on each > affiliated project are accounted for (I was surprised to see Roland's > email to the CAB - I would have expected him to show up on a community > list that is interested in the ksh93 project)? Uhm... I just followed the instructions "send email to CAB Discuss " (and I send an email to April and Mike to nominate themselves, too). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) From al at logical-approach.com Tue Feb 6 15:53:59 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 17:53:59 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognized as a core contributor... In-Reply-To: <45C90AE7.3255E34D@nrubsig.org> References: <45C90AE7.3255E34D@nrubsig.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Roland Mainz wrote: > > Hi! > > ---- > > Following Al's suggestion, I'd like to be recognised as a core > contributor to OpenSolaris. > > My list of contributions to the OpenSolaris project: > > 1. Contributed minor changes to "isaexec" (and more changes are queued > in the request-sponsor list) > 2. One of the leaders of the ksh93-integration project (and the future > followup "shell" project). > > But more importantly, I would like to be considered a core contributor > because I have strong desire to see the community succeed... :-) > The CAB/OGB is pleased to recognize the sustained participation and contribution of Roland Mainz and have him designated as an OpenSolaris Core Contributor - with all the privilidges that this title confers. Roland - you have attained an enviable repution within the OpenSolaris community as the person who took on one of the most difficult and contentious ON integration efforts to date. And you're an OpenSolaris super-hero in my mind. The Korn shell touches on so many parts of ON that it's almost 100% guaranteed that there would be technical disagreement from many different sources. I know that this project has been very difficult and time consuming and that you are the OpenSolaris pioneer in many ways, debugging the contribution/integration process and ARC processes - which probably seems like getting hit in the face by a 220lb (100kg) hammer the first time you encounter them!. Even the terminology takes a bunch of getting used to! [1] We (speaking for the CAB/OGB) are delighted to see you step up to the plate and take on this challenge in a fearless, enterprising and entrepreneurial fashion. :) [1] is it possible to have an ARC review without someone saying/writing the word "taxonomy"!? :) Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From sch at eng.sun.com Tue Feb 6 16:37:54 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 16:37:54 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <45C90FF1.40205@Sun.COM> References: <45C782C3.3010803@ianshome.com> <20070205193144.GF16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7887B.6020707@ianshome.com> <20070205195431.GH16635@eng.sun.com> <45C7A49A.1030409@sun.com> <45C7AA5A.8030001@ianshome.com> <45C7AF48.9020200@tadpole.com> <45C90E12.5030304@richlowe.net> <45C90FF1.40205@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <20070207003754.GD26586@eng.sun.com> * Bonnie Corwin [2007-02-06 15:33]: > I fear I have missed something basic so apologies up front if these are > stupid questions. > > But exactly who draws up each community list using what criteria? Many > communities have multiple leaders. Which leader is expected to submit a > list? And are those people working from a set of criteria? And how are > projects handled? Most are affiliated with a community - is it the > community leader's job to make sure the appropriate people on each > affiliated project are accounted for (I was surprised to see Roland's > email to the CAB - I would have expected him to show up on a community > list that is interested in the ksh93 project)? > > I also wonder if the current list should be posted to > opensolaris-discuss with instructions for who to contact if people think > they are missing from a list - I believe it's only been posted on > cab-discuss which has a smaller audience. The leaders are expected to draw up lists. All leaders have been sent multiple requests for contributors and core contributors, to their personal email addresses. (Reminder mails have also been sent to opensolaris-discuss.) The criteria necessarily differ from community group to community group--a user group lead is different from an advocate in the marketing community is different from the author of a technical document is different from a Python programmer. These topics have been well discussed at various CAB/OGB meetings, and are represented in the current governance draft. The expectation has been that the community leads would recognize that their job is more than just put up a web page or moderate a mailing list, but to actually create a group dynamic around their area of interest. This maturation has happened for some community groups, but not for all. At some point, the Board will look at the community groups, their responsiveness, and their "essentialness" to the larger community. This process will, I believe, allow the community to prune out or combine some of the failed community groups. Evaluating specific cases is beyond my competence (unless they appealed to one of the community groups for which I am currently a lead). - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From Casper.Dik at sun.com Wed Feb 7 04:38:33 2007 From: Casper.Dik at sun.com (Casper.Dik at sun.com) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 13:38:33 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200702071238.l17CcXc9024766@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> > >I'd like to schedule a CAB conf call for tomorrow (Wed, Feb 7th) at the >usual time (12:00 noon Pacific). >Items on the agenda (please add to this list): > >a) CAB/OGB election, status, action items, timing etc. >b) status/opinions on the draft for a GPLv3/dual-licensing leadership >position statement from the CAB (draft sent to the private aliases). >c) why the CAB/OGB has failed to take a leadership position with the >OpenSolaris community to date. > >I look forward to talking with you all tomorrow. Same here; see you guys all there. Casper From rich.teer at rite-group.com Wed Feb 7 07:20:31 2007 From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 07:20:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Al Hopper wrote: > I'd like to schedule a CAB conf call for tomorrow (Wed, Feb 7th) at the > usual time (12:00 noon Pacific). I'm really pressed for time these days, but due to the importance of the agenda items, I'll be there! -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich From fielding at gbiv.com Wed Feb 7 11:40:09 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 11:40:09 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10E4FA0C-2F0E-4D7E-BFFD-0D0272B65512@gbiv.com> On Feb 6, 2007, at 3:36 PM, Al Hopper wrote: > I'd like to schedule a CAB conf call for tomorrow (Wed, Feb 7th) at > the > usual time (12:00 noon Pacific). Fine with me, but somebody should send the call-in information privately. The information I have is from last November. ....Roy From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 7 11:53:23 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 11:53:23 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] List of members, 2/7 Message-ID: <20070207195322.GA1500@eng.sun.com> Today's version has the recent OGB additions, plus a few other corrections. There are 241 core contributors. My next step is to do a final cleaning and then upload into the contributor table, with an initial date of today, which we'll reset after ratification (to the ratification date). We can continue to refresh the lists, but I'll do it using the table at that point. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ -------------- next part -------------- academic contributor joe.g driving edu engagement in India academic contributor moinakg driving edu engagement in India, Belenix creator academic contributor patrickf previous community leader and core contributor academic core joey drove curriculum effort in China, Starter Kit translation academic core michelle wrote curriculum guide, key Starter Kit contributor academic core teresag community leader approach contributor anay significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor anupcs significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor bustos significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor carlsonj significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor darrenm significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor davidjon significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor dminer significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor kcpoon significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor lianep significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor meem significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor mph significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor okie significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor sfbiggar significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach contributor xzh significant contributor to NWAM project discussions approach core jbeck project leader for NWAM project discussions arc contributor ahl arc contributor ahrens arc contributor alanh arc contributor alanp arc contributor alecm arc contributor alib arc contributor anish arc contributor artem arc contributor asano arc contributor barts arc contributor blu arc contributor bonwick arc contributor by38662 arc contributor calum arc contributor casper arc contributor ceci.hu arc contributor cindi arc contributor cth arc contributor darrenr arc contributor dchieu arc contributor dp arc contributor is arc contributor jbeck arc contributor jg arc contributor jhf arc contributor johnz arc contributor kupfer arc contributor lianep arc contributor mahaines arc contributor maybee arc contributor meem arc contributor mws arc contributor petede arc contributor pgdh arc contributor raf arc contributor randyf arc contributor rie arc contributor sarito arc contributor sch arc contributor seb arc contributor song arc contributor speer arc contributor taylor arc contributor tcm arc contributor tsk arc contributor wendy.phillips arc contributor wyllys arc core carlsonj arc core edgould arc core glenn arc core gww arc core jek3 arc core kais arc core plocher arc core sommerfe arc core tpm brandz contributor ahl Adam Leventhal developed the BrandZ DTrace and ptrace support brandz contributor hannken Juergen Hannken-Illjes has contributed a number of bugfixes to BrandZ. brandz contributor jcm Jerri-Ann Meyer is the engineering manager for BrandZ brandz contributor kirk Kirk Wells is the program manager for BrandZ brandz core edp Ed Pilatowicz owns all the BrandZ device support brandz core kucharsk Bill Kucharski owns the BrandZ installation support, as well as everything to do with signals. brandz core nilsn Nils Nieuwejaar is the technical lead for BrandZ brandz core rab Russ Blaine owns all BrandZ work related to linking and debugging cab contributor benr cab contributor sch cab contributor wesolows cab core alhopper cab core brushmor cab core casper cab core fielding cab core gdamore cab core gisburn cab core ian cab core rich cab core webmink desktop contributor calumb Calum Benson desktop contributor drdoug Doug Scott desktop contributor ericb Eric Boutilier desktop contributor justinc Justin Conover desktop contributor kmays Ken Mays desktop contributor steleman Stefan Teleman desktop core davelam Dave Lin desktop core dcarbery Damien Carbery desktop core dermot Dermot McCluskey desktop core dkenny Darren Kenny desktop core gman Glynn Foster desktop core laca Laca Peter desktop core padraig Padraig O'Briain desktop core yippi Brian Cameron desktop core yippi Brian Cameron documentation contributor alta Alta Elstad provided the Device Driver Tutorial as open source and is a leader of the Device Driver community documentation contributor cindys Cindy Swearingen provided the ZFS ADmin Guide as open source and is a leader of the ZFS community documentation contributor dlindt David Lindt contributed feedback on community direction and helps laision for docs between SDN and OpenSolaris documentation contributor frankho Frank Hoffman contributed Crashdump analysis book and aggregate of blogs about filesystem development documentation contributor gherteg Glenn Herteg contibuted How To Setup OpenSolaris with Yahoo DSL and feedback on IPFilter docs and code impl documentation contributor ginnie Ginnie Wray contributed content for the original Big Doc List and an install tech talk documentation contributor layne Layne Ethington contributed nfsmapid description for community review documentation contributor linnea Linnea Wickstrom has contributed feedback and suggestions on the web site design documentation contributor markb Mark Brundege developed the tool to convert Solbook to DocBook documentation contributor mickm Michael Monaghan contributed tools and design to convert the global glossary to a wikipedia documentation contributor mws Mike Shapiro provided the Dynamic Tracing Guide as open source and is a leader of the DTrace community documentation contributor sbrucker Stephanie Brucker has addressed community feedback on IPFilter docs and is a leader of Quagga project documentation contributor wesolows Keith Wesolowski contributed the OpenSolaris Developer's reference guide as open source documentation core benr Ben Rockwood has created the wiki and source repository for our community along with defining direction of tools documentation core bgregg Brendan Gregg has contributed several documents and leadership on direction of the Docs community documentation core elowe Eric Lowe has provided conversion tools and engineering expertise to help provide books as open source documentation core rheilke Rainer Heilke has provided consistently helpful feedback on writing guidelines and developed a quick start documentation core sweber Sue Weber has defined the roadmap and worked closely with legal to determine licensing practices dtrace core ahl Initial core contributor dtrace core bgregg Initial core contributor dtrace core bmc Initial core contributor dtrace core mws Initial core contributor fm contributor eschrock Eric Schrock fm contributor sethg Seth Goldberg fm contributor wesolows Keith Wesolowski fm core cindi Cindi McGuire fm core cwb Chris Beal fm core gavinm Gavin Maltby fm core mws Mike Shapiro fm core robj Rob Johnston fm core stephh Steve Hanson i18n contributor brig Brigitte contributed French localization style guide for the French group and active in the French group. i18n contributor by38662 Brian is the leader of Chinese groups. i18n contributor cerveny Martin is the Czech group leader. i18n contributor csj J\341nos is the Hugarian group leader. i18n contributor jayaradh Jayaradha is the leader of Indic groups. i18n contributor mayoral Luis is the Spanish group leader. i18n contributor rrabadan Ruben contributed Latin American keyboard layout files and other necessary changes. i18n contributor ss39446 Siva contributed Tamil UTF-8 locale to the community. i18n contributor suresh Suresh is the Malayalam group leader. i18n contributor tifeo Daniele is the Italian group leader. i18n contributor tonyn Tony is the Vietnamese group leader. i18n core is Ienup is a community leader and tries to contribute in various areas and aspects of the community. i18n core laurent Laurent is the French group leader and actively maintains the French group. i18n core thiguchi Takaaki is the Japanese group leader and actively maintains the Japanese group. i18n core vinny Vinny is the Portuguese Brazil leader and actively maintains the Portuguese Brazil group. i18n core yjsong Young is a community leader and tries to contribute in various areas and aspects of the community. immigrants contributor tdh Authoring and blogging about OpenSolaris and Solaris for newcomers. immigrants core ahl Initial core contributor. immigrants core benr Presently leading community. install contributor barts Bart Smaalders install contributor jhf James Falkner install contributor mattw151 Matt Williamson install contributor mgerdts Mike Gerdts install core carlsonj James Carlson install core dambi Jan Damborsky install core dminer Dave Miner install core equach Ethan Quach install core glagasse Glenn Lagasse install core nadkarni Sanjay Nadkarni install core ptribble Peter Tribble install core sjelinek Sarah Jelinek install core tsk Tim Knitter install core ysundar Sundar Yamunachari laptop core andrei laptop core bobn laptop core brian.xu laptop core bustos laptop core casper laptop core ceci.hu laptop core dchieu laptop core gdamore laptop core judy laptop core nadkarni laptop core quaker marketing contributor bonnie on all calls, great reviewer, helps to balance mktg with eng requirements marketing contributor richteer another voice of the community and willing reviewer on docs and proposals marketing contributor spp Stephen is always willing to offer input on mktg activities marketing core benr voice of community a lot for mktg ideas marketing core lkr healthy participator in conversations and proposals marketing core patrickf bi-weekly stats contributions, conversation on list marketing core sarad community lead marketing core teresag Community support and integration with other communities marketing core timf offers all sorts of help and input and support mdb core ahl mdb core eschrock mdb core johnlev mdb core mws mdb core simmonmt network contributor carlsonj numerous contributions to various community discussions network contributor carolg provided various important support to the community and the Crossbow project network contributor danmcd Dan McDonald network contributor danmcd multiple contributions to various discussions, submitted design docs for review network contributor darrenr multiple contributions to IPFilter and other design reviews network contributor dme significant contributions to community discussions network contributor kais contributed to various discussions of the community and Crossbow project network contributor krgopi Rajagopal Kunhappan - Contributor to Solaris networking in general, Crossbow and Nemo network contributor markfen Mark Fenwick network contributor mll3k Mike Lim - Contributor to the crossbow admin model discussion on opensolaris network contributor nordmark several contributions to various discussions of the networking community and Crossbow project network contributor pwernau Paul Wernau network contributor rshoaib numerous contributions to various community discussions network contributor seb significant contributions to Clearview project and other discussions, submitted design docs for review network contributor sommerfeld Bill Sommerfeld network contributor yun Cathy Zhou - Clearview lead engineer - Run all design discussion on the project's OpenSolaris page network contributor yun significant contributions to discussions, submitted design docs for review network core carlsonj James Carlson - Architect and active contributor to crossbow-discuss, clearview, networking ... network core darrenr Darren Reed - Active contributor to multiple networking related projects. Author of the Open source IPFilter network core kais Kais Belgaied - Co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris network core meem numerous contributions to discussions, lead of Clearview project network core ndroux numerous contributions to various discussions, active co-leader of the Nemo and Crossbow projects network core nordmark Erik Nordmark leader of the IP instances project on OpenSolaris. Active contributor to the network community - co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris network core sunay active co-leader of the Crossbow project, significant contributions of architecture documents to the community network core thiru Thirumalai Sinivasan Subject matter expert for the core networking. nfs core robert_gordon Robert Gordon nfs core shepler Spencer Shepler nfs core siddheshwar Siddheshwar V. Mahesh on contributor carlsonj James Carlson - Architect and active contributor to crossbow-discuss, clearview, networking ... on contributor darrenr Darren Reed - Active contributor to multiple networking related projects. Author of the Open source IPFilter on contributor kais Kais Belgaied - Co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris on contributor krgopi Rajagopal Kunhappan - Contributor to Solaris networking in general, Crossbow and Nemo on contributor mll3k Mike Lim - Contributor to the crossbow admin model discussion on opensolaris on contributor nordmark Erik Nordmark leader of the IP instances project on OpenSolaris. Active contributor to the network community - co-leader of the crossbow project on OpenSolaris on contributor thiru Thirumalai Sinivasan Subject matter expert for the core networking. on contributor yun Cathy Zhou - Clearview lead engineer - Run all design discussion on the project's OpenSolaris page on core ags on core ahl on core ahrens on core artem on core barts on core batschul on core billt on core bmc on core bonwick on core bubbva on core bw on core casper on core cindi on core comay on core cwb on core damico on core dduvall on core dep on core djl on core dmick on core eshrock on core exodus on core frits on core gavinm on core jbeck on core jg on core jhd on core johnz on core kupfer on core lclee on core maybee on core mikechr on core minh on core mjnelson on core mws on core nickto on core nilsn on core petede on core peteh on core raf on core sch on core sdussud on core sethg on core shao on core shepler on core tpm on core wendyp performance core akolb Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core andrei Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core barts Contributor in many areas of performance characterization and improvement. performance core dp Contributes to many areas of OpenSolaris. performance core esaxe Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core jjc Expert in the areas of CMT, MPO, scheduling, et.al. performance core johansen performance core mpogue Experienced in the area of Kernel Performance. performance core rmc Contributor in many areas of performance characterization and improvement. ppc contributor bbrv active in forum ppc contributor bochnig source contributor, active in forum ppc contributor cjs supports Polaris Wiki, active in forum ppc contributor joerg active in forum ppc contributor kmays active in forum ppc contributor kucharsk technical info provider ppc contributor mwsealey active in forum ppc contributor nerant source contributor, active in forum ppc contributor svenl active in forum ppc contributor szhou Shudong Zhou active in forum ppc contributor yanyh source contributor, active in forum ppc core ahl original leader, was active in forum ppc core dclarke hosts Polaris site, original organizer, ppc core imp leads community contribution, active in forum ppc core rarebit leads SunLabs contribution and overall port effort security contributor danmcd Dan McDonald security contributor markfen Mark Fenwick security contributor pwernau Paul Wernau security contributor sommerfeld Bill Sommerfeld smf contrib arushi04 doc and help contributor smf contrib bnsmb doc contributor (FAQ) smf contrib dminer help and code contributor smf contrib fourctom code contributor smf contrib hshaw code contributor smf contrib jeanm code contributor smf contrib jkeil code contributor smf contrib kathy doc and help contributor smf contrib nico help contributor smf contrib richlowe code contributor smf contrib yannouch code contributor smf core bustos doc, help, code contributor and project lead smf core dep doc, help, code contributor and project lead smf core jwadams doc, help, and code contributor smf core lianep doc, help, and code contributor smf core sch doc, help, and code contributor testing contributor jleser John supports opensolaris testing testing contributor robj discussion, blogs and UG meetings testing core cmnolan ON-PIT, self-service testing core contributor testing core fintanr Fintan leads performance test areas and part of self-service team testing core helenc nfs test lead testing core jwalker Jim leads testing and does discussions, blogs and UG meetings testing core michaelb discussions, UG meetings testing core nickyv Perf-PIT core contributor testing core quim ON-PIT, self-service testing core contributor testing core seanmcg performance discussions, blogs and UG meetings testing core timf Tim is a big contributor: discussions, blogs and UG meetings tools contrib casper cscope-fast contribution; SCM (esp. Teamware) knowledge tools contrib comay multiple bfu contributions tools contrib danmcd multiple tools putbacks (crypto) tools contrib dmick multiple tools contributions tools contrib dp multiple contributions tools contrib eschrock multiple tools contributions tools contrib girishl multiple tools contributions (sun4v support) tools contrib jg multiple tools contributions tools contrib johnz crypto tools expert tools contrib jwadams multiple tools contributions tools contrib lclee multiple bfu contributions tools contrib rab multiple contributions tools contrib richlowe bfu and build contributions tools contrib robinson multiple bfu contributions tools contrib rorth multiple contributions to tools and other areas tools contrib semery multiple bfu contributions tools contrib sherrym multiple tools contributions tools contrib simmonmt part of original CTF team tools contrib szhou multiple tools contributions tools contrib tucker contribution to bfu and crypto tool handling tools contrib willf multiple contributions to wx tools core alanbur tools core alanbur responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core ali Developer of link-editing technology, related tools, and associated documentation. tools core bjc tools core darrenm crypto tools expert tools core dcicero8 tools core dduvall ON gatekeeper tools core fvdl responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core garypen tools core garypen responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core johnlev multiple ctf contributions tools core kupfer responsible for current opensolaris build infrastructure tools core meem multiple tools contributions; strong cleanliness proponent tools core mike_s long-time expert on the build tools core mjnelson onnv tech lead tools core petede Nevada assistant tech lead tools core raf CRT advocate covering the build tools core rie Developer of link-editing technology, related tools, and associated documentation. tools core sch responsible for SCM infrastructure tools core setje newboot expert tools core sommerfeld multiple contributions; strong cleanliness proponent tools core stevel responsible for current opensolaris build infrastructure, SCM tools core wesolows responsible for the shadow build infrastructure, gcc usergroup contributor sriramn Sriram has been a very active contributor in the BOSUG mailing list usergroup core a.sundar Chennai OSUG A. Sundararajan usergroup core aalok Alok Aggarwal ATLOSUG contributor & Solaris developer usergroup core adam_Z Adam Zhang started and runs Shanghai User Group. usergroup core akolb Alexander Kolbasov leader in the MOSUG usergroup core aland Alan Duboff started and runs the SVOSUG usergroup core aland Silicon Valley OSUG Alan DuBoff usergroup core alanh Alan Hargreaves started and runs the SOSUG. usergroup core alanh Sydney OSUG Alan Hargreaves usergroup core andrei Moscow OSUG Andrei Dorofeev usergroup core Ashok Ashok Kumar Gupta Madurai OSUG member usergroup core asyd Bruno Bonfils leader of the FOSUG usergroup core bgregg Brendan Gregg Repeat Presentor and DTrace Guru, SOSUG usergroup core bm91119 Bart Muijzer started and runs NLOSUG usergroup core boyd Boyd Adamson presenter, SOSUG usergroup core bubli Czech OSUG Katarina Machalkova usergroup core casper Casper Dik runs NLOSUG usergroup core cerveny Czech OSUG Martin Cerveny usergroup core che Ch? Kristo Driving force to the formation of the SOSUG usergroup core codelion Asankhaya Sharma started and runs the NITW opensolaris group usergroup core codelion Warangal NIT OSUG Asankhaya Sharma usergroup core davemq Austin OSUG Dave Marquardt usergroup core dickson Atlanta OSUG Scott Dickson usergroup core dickson Scott Dickson leader of the ATLOSUG usergroup core e1_sun Iwan Rahabok leader of the Singapore OSUG. usergroup core eggboy Jay Lee started and leads the KOSUG usergroup core elowe Eric Lowe coordinated and has spoken at the Austin OSUG usergroup core ericb Eric Boutilier contributes to the UG community, started the GLUG usergroup core ericb Great Lakes OSUG Eric Boutilier usergroup core fintanr Fintan Ryan IEOSUG leader, OS test usergroup core fintanr Irish OSUG Fintan Ryan usergroup core flip SVOSUG Phillip "Flip" Russell usergroup core forrest Beijing OSUG Jun-Chao Forrest Wu usergroup core ghreyes Gustavo Reyes contributes heavily to the AOSUG usergroup core ginnie Front Rage OSUG Ginnie Wray usergroup core ginnie Virginia Wray started and runs the FROSUG usergroup core gmack Gregg Mackenzie involved in FROSUG usergroup core grahadea Grahadea Kusuf started and runs OSUG-Indonesia usergroup core gwilson George Wilson ATLOSUG leader usergroup core hsaltiel Argentina OSUG Hern?n Saltiel usergroup core hsaltiel Hern?n Saltiel started and runs Argentine AOSUG usergroup core iktorn Victor Latushkin leader in the MOSUG usergroup core imp Israel OSUG Cyril Plisko usergroup core jclulow Joshua Clulow consistantly present in #opensolaris for SOSUG usergroup core jco Swiss OSUG Javier Conde usergroup core jimgris Jim Grisanzio, engineering community manager usergroup core jjj Joep Vesseur runs NLOSUG usergroup core jmcp James McPherson Repeat Presenter, SOSUG usergroup core jonb FROSUG Jon Bowman usergroup core jonb Jon Bowman started and runs FROSUG usergroup core jurikm Milan Jurik Czech OSUG leader usergroup core jurikm Czech OSUG Milan Jurik usergroup core jwalker Jim Walker started and involved in FROSUG usergroup core kavit Kavit Munshi Presenter and early Driver, SOSUG usergroup core kjelle Kjell H?gstr?m started and runs SWOSUG usergroup core kjelle Sweden OSUG Kjell H?gstr?m usergroup core kjy02i Roger Kim KOSUG member usergroup core km103805 Swiss OSUG Karim Mazouni usergroup core knoche Bill Knoche involved in FROSUG usergroup core laurent French OSUG Laurent Blume usergroup core laurent Laurent Blume FOSUG leader usergroup core lisagab FROSUG Lisa M. Week usergroup core lisagab Lisa Week started and runs the FROSUG usergroup core lkr New England OSUG Laura Ramsey usergroup core lxf Xinfeng Liu started and runs Shanghai User Group. usergroup core macrae Adhari C Mahendra runs OSUG-Indonesia usergroup core matty Ryan Matteson open source contributor and active in ATLOSUG usergroup core mcerveny Martin Cerveny Czech OSUG leader usergroup core Mdavemq Dave Marquardt helped set up and run the Austin OSUG usergroup core mmman Czech OSUG Martin Man usergroup core mmman Martin Man Czech OSUG leader usergroup core moinakg Moinak is the lead developer of the BeleniX OpenSolaris distro usergroup core mwaterl FROSUG Moriah Waterland usergroup core mwaterl Moriah Waterland started and runs FROSUG usergroup core mwolfe Raleigh OSUG Michael Wolfe usergroup core nathank Nathan Kroenert Presenter, SOSUG usergroup core nerant Jeremy Teo contributes to the Singapore OSUG usergroup core nino German OSUG Nenad Cimerman usergroup core ofsen Turkey OSUG Omer Faruk Sen usergroup core oliver Beijing OSUG Oliver Yang usergroup core patrickf Patrick Finch patrickf, runs NLOSUG. usergroup core pbg New England OSUG Peter Baer Galvin usergroup core petervg Peter van Gemer runs NLOSUG usergroup core pgomez1 Venezuela OSUG Pedro Gomez usergroup core praveen Praveen Krishnamoorthy started and runs Madurai OSUG usergroup core pwl Peter Lees early driver, SOSUG usergroup core ravisank Ravisankar Balaji Madurai OSUG member usergroup core remcof Remco Fug runs NLOSUG usergroup core samf FROSUG Sam L. Falkner usergroup core samf Sam Falkner started and runs FROSUG usergroup core sarad Austin OSUG Sara Dornsife usergroup core sarad Sara Dornsife got the Austin OSUG going. usergroup core seanmcg Sean McGrath IEOSUG contributor extraordinaire, OS test usergroup core sep Russia OSUG Sergei Pikalev usergroup core shambles Sean Sprague leads the LOSUG. usergroup core skamm Susan Kamm-Worrell runs FROSUG usergroup core sqliang Singapore OSUG Seng-Quee Liang usergroup core subhash Hyderabad OSUG Subhash Singh Thakur usergroup core thiguchi Nihon Sun UG Takaaki Higuchi usergroup core timf Tim Foster IEOSUG leader, marketing wannabe, zfs fan, OS test usergroup core tunla Lars Tunkrans runs SWOSUG usergroup core twest Tom West involved in FROSUG usergroup core ulf London OSUG Ulf Andreasson usergroup core venkytv Bangalore OSUG Venky TV usergroup core venkytv Venkateshwara TV leader of the BOSUG usergroup core victor Beijing OSUG Di-Li Victor Hu x core alanc (Alan Coopersmith) x core jacotton (Jay Cotton) x core skk (Stuart Kreitman) zfs core ahrens Initial core contributor zfs core billm Initial core contributor zfs core bonwick Initial core contributor zfs core chua Initial core contributor zfs core cindys Initial core contributor zfs core dp Initial core contributor zfs core eschrock Initial core contributor zfs core goo Initial core contributor zfs core johansen zfs core lalt Initial core contributor zfs core marks Initial core contributor zfs core maybee Initial core contributor zfs core ndellofa Initial core contributor zfs core perrin Initial core contributor zfs core tabriz Initial core contributor zones contrib jeffv Jeff Victor is a frequent and valuable contributor to the zones community zones contributor mgerdts Community contributor to zones development zones contributor pcotten Technical writer for zones zones contributor richlowe Community contributor to zones development zones core allan Allan McKillop is the engineering manager for zones zones core annt Ann Togasaki is the program manager for zones zones core comay David Comay is a former technical lead for zones zones core dp Dan Price is the technical lead for zones zones core gjelinek Jerry Jelinek is a senior engineer working on zones zones core stevelaw Steve Lawrence is an engineer working on resource management, which has direct relationship with the zones community. From webmink at sun.com Wed Feb 7 14:11:01 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:11:01 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Only just got on the net & picked this up (have been offline since Mon) - are there minutes? S. On Feb 6, 2007, at 15:36, Al Hopper wrote: > > I'd like to schedule a CAB conf call for tomorrow (Wed, Feb 7th) at > the > usual time (12:00 noon Pacific). > > Items on the agenda (please add to this list): > > a) CAB/OGB election, status, action items, timing etc. > b) status/opinions on the draft for a GPLv3/dual-licensing leadership > position statement from the CAB (draft sent to the private aliases). > c) why the CAB/OGB has failed to take a leadership position with the > OpenSolaris community to date. > > I look forward to talking with you all tomorrow. > > Regards, > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 7 14:46:11 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 14:46:11 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070207224611.GB1806@eng.sun.com> * Simon Phipps [2007-02-07 14:11]: > Only just got on the net & picked this up (have been offline since > Mon) - are there minutes? I'm still eating lunch, but I'll type up my (brief) notes shortly. - Stephen From webmink at sun.com Wed Feb 7 15:35:30 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:35:30 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <20070207224611.GB1806@eng.sun.com> References: <20070207224611.GB1806@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <9A46A67A-97C1-4D28-BD5C-C45E77B8F105@sun.com> On Feb 7, 2007, at 14:46, Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Simon Phipps [2007-02-07 14:11]: >> Only just got on the net & picked this up (have been offline since >> Mon) - are there minutes? > > I'm still eating lunch, but I'll type up my (brief) notes shortly. Thanks Stephen. I am dismayed to see the OGB statement that has already been propagated. I feel my perspective has not been considered and given the short notice at which the meeting was called I feel it would have been appropriate to take longer reflecting before issuing a position statement, especially considering how controversial the issue is and how polarised opinions are. While the summary is reasonable, it is incomplete and the conclusions and "decree" are one-sided. I'd suggest this sort of kangaroo-court behaviour is unacceptable and I'd request that it not be repeated. S. From fielding at gbiv.com Wed Feb 7 20:00:16 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 20:00:16 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <9A46A67A-97C1-4D28-BD5C-C45E77B8F105@sun.com> References: <20070207224611.GB1806@eng.sun.com> <9A46A67A-97C1-4D28-BD5C-C45E77B8F105@sun.com> Message-ID: <506AC44C-4910-416D-924F-FD6BEF486AA1@gbiv.com> On Feb 7, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > I am dismayed to see the OGB statement that has already been > propagated. I feel my perspective has not been considered and given > the short notice at which the meeting was called I feel it would > have been appropriate to take longer reflecting before issuing a > position statement, especially considering how controversial the > issue is and how polarised opinions are. I think that, given the topic and the nature of the legal issues involved, the subject should have been broached with the OGB before it was made into a PR topic by Sun officials. The subsequent damage to everyone's productivity could have been avoided with a more balanced and reasonable approach to the whole discussion. In particular, making predictions about an unreleased version of the GPLv3 draft that is not yet subject to public review, and then asking the whole community to comment on potential ramifications of that unknown draft's use for OpenSolaris, is an irresponsible action. Period. > While the summary is reasonable, it is incomplete and the > conclusions and "decree" are one-sided. I'd suggest this sort of > kangaroo-court behaviour is unacceptable and I'd request that it > not be repeated. The OGB (or any deliberative body) cannot be hamstrung from action just because one of its members happens to be off-line without telling any of us. I don't expect the group to abdicate responsibility whenever I am not available, and neither should you. Two days was enough notice given that it was our regularly scheduled time slot, the affirmative votes were more than necessary to pass the resolution even if you had been there to participate, we already knew about and took into consideration the views you expressed, and if you don't like the resolution then you can raise the issue again at our next meeting. That is the process we have defined. In the future, you should look up the definition of kangaroo court before throwing it around. It is just a decision, like any other, and the OGB is the right entity to make it. ....Roy From webmink at sun.com Wed Feb 7 22:15:26 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 22:15:26 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <506AC44C-4910-416D-924F-FD6BEF486AA1@gbiv.com> References: <20070207224611.GB1806@eng.sun.com> <9A46A67A-97C1-4D28-BD5C-C45E77B8F105@sun.com> <506AC44C-4910-416D-924F-FD6BEF486AA1@gbiv.com> Message-ID: On Feb 7, 2007, at 20:00, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Feb 7, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: >> I am dismayed to see the OGB statement that has already been >> propagated. I feel my perspective has not been considered and >> given the short notice at which the meeting was called I feel it >> would have been appropriate to take longer reflecting before >> issuing a position statement, especially considering how >> controversial the issue is and how polarised opinions are. > > I think that, given the topic and the nature of the legal issues > involved, the subject should have been broached with the OGB > before it was made into a PR topic by Sun officials. The subsequent > damage to everyone's productivity could have been avoided with > a more balanced and reasonable approach to the whole discussion. I agree. That does not mean the OGB has to respond in kind. > > In particular, making predictions about an unreleased version of the > GPLv3 draft that is not yet subject to public review, and then asking > the whole community to comment on potential ramifications of that > unknown draft's use for OpenSolaris, is an irresponsible action. > Period. I agree. Again, that does not mean the OGB has to respond in kind. > >> While the summary is reasonable, it is incomplete and the >> conclusions and "decree" are one-sided. I'd suggest this sort of >> kangaroo-court behaviour is unacceptable and I'd request that it >> not be repeated. > > The OGB (or any deliberative body) cannot be hamstrung from action > just because one of its members happens to be off-line without telling > any of us. I don't expect the group to abdicate responsibility > whenever > I am not available, and neither should you. I disagree. While routine and urgent actions need to be taken in the way you describe, the subject is too complex and sensitive to wind up so hurriedly and the outcome smacks of a rush to judgement. While the group was within its rights to act, common sense should have dictated that a more considered approach be taken. > > Two days was enough notice given that it was our regularly scheduled > time slot, the affirmative votes were more than necessary to pass > the resolution even if you had been there to participate, we already > knew about and took into consideration the views you expressed, and > if you don't like the resolution then you can raise the issue again > at our next meeting. Indeed I shall. You did not seek my view and you have no idea what it is as I have not expressed it publicly. Neither has there been any discussion by the OGB outside the meeting held today beyond the limited elements we are aware prior to this controversy. Please do not make these assumptions about my prejudice just because you assume I am Sun's stooge; it is beneath you and I am not. > > That is the process we have defined. > > In the future, you should look up the definition of kangaroo > court before throwing it around. It is just a decision, like > any other, and the OGB is the right entity to make it. I hope you feel the same in a similar circumstance where the outcome is not one you find acceptable. My choice of language reflects the depth of my feeling and the lack of respect I feel has been expressed towards me. Just because I am British it doesn't mean I don't understand English you know. S. From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Wed Feb 7 22:16:34 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 22:16:34 -0800 Subject: Fwd: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call References: Message-ID: This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. S. Begin forwarded message: > From: Al Hopper > Date: February 6, 2007 15:36:13 PST > To: CAB Discuss > Cc: Stephen Hahn > Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call > > > I'd like to schedule a CAB conf call for tomorrow (Wed, Feb 7th) at > the > usual time (12:00 noon Pacific). > > Items on the agenda (please add to this list): > > a) CAB/OGB election, status, action items, timing etc. > b) status/opinions on the draft for a GPLv3/dual-licensing leadership > position statement from the CAB (draft sent to the private aliases). > c) why the CAB/OGB has failed to take a leadership position with the > OpenSolaris community to date. > > I look forward to talking with you all tomorrow. > > Regards, > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2494 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 00:16:34 2007 From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 09:16:34 +0100 Subject: Fwd: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> >This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as soon as Al floated the CAB position paper. There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to prevent it from being overtaken by events. Casper From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 01:56:22 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 01:56:22 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> Message-ID: <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> On Feb 8, 2007, at 00:16, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > >> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. > > I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as soon as > Al floated the CAB position paper. > > There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to prevent > it from being overtaken by events. I was refuting Roy's assertion there was 2 days notice. I have no problem with the meeting, nor with the need to discuss in my absence. But I think waiting until next week to publish a position would have been both smart and respectful. S. From Casper.Dik at sun.com Thu Feb 8 03:02:43 2007 From: Casper.Dik at sun.com (Casper.Dik at sun.com) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:02:43 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] The new "The Love you Take is equal to the Love you Make" Open(2) License In-Reply-To: References: <10500047.1170791921453.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <17864.58781.568552.834841@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Message-ID: <200702081102.l18B2hdB009240@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> > >On Feb 6, 2007, at 12:31, James Carlson wrote: > >> >> GPLv3 doesn't exist, and therefore doesn't matter. There's no way to >> compare it with anything. (Well, except for the set of other >> non-existent things, to which it's equal. ;-}) > >The drafts are public and clear. See http://gplv3.fsf.org (note: >this is not an endorsement, just a data point) The proposal from Sun was incomplete and premature. Premature, because there is no finalized GPLv3 yet. At engineering inside Sun , we are usually very careful not to implement "draft standards"; this can lead to accidents like "DCE pthreads", "POSIX capabilities in Linux" or Solaris UFS ACLs. Things are "draft" because they're not done; they've not done for a good reason. Incomplete, because there was no legalese which described the "assembly exception": >GPLv3 will definitely be a replacement for GPLv2 and as such it will >be a project-based license. The only file-by-file behaviour available >will be in the form of the LGPLv3 if an when that gets finalised. The project based nature of GPLv3 is a problem; it cannot be made to work with OpenSolaris. While the exact assembly exception was left out of the proposal, we can second guess this by assuming that this assembly exception somehow makes the GPLv3 file based. The draft GPLv3 makes clear that such exceptions are automatically dropped when the file is licensed and need to be added back explicitely by people redistributing changed source. Casper From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 03:07:52 2007 From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:07:52 +0100 Subject: Fwd: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200702081107.l18B7r4L009831@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> >This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. I'm surprised you missed it, though, considering you had time for: http://www.devxnews.com/article.php/3658526 and http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3658526 I'm having some issues with this quote: "Ultimately in each of those cases, Sun is the copyright holder and it is Sun that has to take the action," Phipps said. "So ultimately the decision is mine." Casper From al at logical-approach.com Thu Feb 8 04:37:17 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 06:37:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Simon Phipps wrote: > > On Feb 8, 2007, at 00:16, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > > > > >> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. > > > > I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as soon as > > Al floated the CAB position paper. > > > > There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to prevent > > it from being overtaken by events. > > I was refuting Roy's assertion there was 2 days notice. I have no > problem with the meeting, nor with the need to discuss in my absence. > But I think waiting until next week to publish a position would have > been both smart and respectful. > There was very close to 2 days notice. See the bottom of this included message and the header timestamps: > From al at logical-approach.com Mon Feb 5 16:20:14 2007 -0600 > Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 16:20:14 -0600 (CST) > From: Al Hopper > To: OpenSolaris-CAB at Sun.COM > Subject: CAB/OGB position on GPLv3 dual license > Message-ID: > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Status: R > X-Status: > > > I'm working on a draft of a statement of the CABs position related to dual > licensing OpenSolaris with a CDDL/GPLv3 license. What I'd like to do is > publish a unamimous statement of position/direction and provide some > CAB/OGB leadership for the project. > > So I'll define the first draft of the CABs position and get each CAB/OGB > members up/down vote in regard to: > > a) the general decision related to dual licensing > b) whether or not you can endorse the statement as it stands > c) suggested edits before you could/would endorse it > > I'd like to present a clear position with minimal legalistic or political > language and provide leadership position to the OpenSolaris project which > will be useful for the entire community. When this is complete and agreed > to by a majority of the CAB/OGB, I'd like to push it to cab-discuss and > opensolaris-discuss. > > Here is the first draft: > > ----------- > > The CAB/OGB believes that there is little, if any, benefit to > dual-licensing OpenSolaris with CDDL and the yet to be approved/upcoming > GPLv3 license - aside from possible good press for the project. In > addition, the CAB/OGB believes that there are significant downsides to > dual licensing, including, but not limited to, license complexity, > confusion and the possibility of bad press from any exception language > that such a license would inevitably require. Further, the CAB/OGB > believes that GPL* licensing OpenSolaris would be yielding to a small > vocal minority of FOSS developers who use the lack of GPL licensing, > purely as a means of fostering FUD towards the project and who will, in > all likelyhood, find some other workable mechanism to continue to foster > FUD towards the project. The CAB/OGB believes that there are higher > priority action items to be completed in order to build developer > mindshare and that this opinion is held by a large number of current > contributors and acts as a barrier to other potential contributors. > > The CAB/OGB recommends that any option related to GPLv3 dual licensing be > re-assessed no sooner than 6 months after the GPLv3 has been published and > approved and that any further discussions related to it postponed until > that general timeframe. In addition the CAB/OGB believes that further > discussion on GPL is merely a diversion and distraction that should be > discouraged, so as to allow the community to concentrate on the higher > priority action items, until that timeframe. > > --------- > > PS: I'd like to take this to cab-discuss ASAP (as soon as we have a > workable first draft). If this is not complete by Wednesday 7th, I'd like > to schedule a CAB conference call with this item on the top of the agenda > to get completed and published. > > Regards, > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 > Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From al at logical-approach.com Thu Feb 8 04:44:49 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 06:44:49 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <9A46A67A-97C1-4D28-BD5C-C45E77B8F105@sun.com> References: <20070207224611.GB1806@eng.sun.com> <9A46A67A-97C1-4D28-BD5C-C45E77B8F105@sun.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Simon Phipps wrote: > > On Feb 7, 2007, at 14:46, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > > * Simon Phipps [2007-02-07 14:11]: > >> Only just got on the net & picked this up (have been offline since > >> Mon) - are there minutes? > > > > I'm still eating lunch, but I'll type up my (brief) notes shortly. > > Thanks Stephen. > > I am dismayed to see the OGB statement that has already been > propagated. I feel my perspective has not been considered and given > the short notice at which the meeting was called I feel it would have > been appropriate to take longer reflecting before issuing a position > statement, especially considering how controversial the issue is and > how polarised opinions are. > > While the summary is reasonable, it is incomplete and the conclusions > and "decree" are one-sided. I'd suggest this sort of kangaroo-court > behaviour is unacceptable and I'd request that it not be repeated. The use of the term "kangaroo-court" is inapplicable, unwarranted, derogatory, unacceptable and unhelpful. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 07:08:33 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 07:08:33 -0800 Subject: Fwd: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> Message-ID: <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: >> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. > > I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as soon as > Al floated the CAB position paper. > > There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to prevent > it from being overtaken by events. The CAB could have simply released its draft in progress with the comment that since its creation was rushed and not all the CAB members had been given reasonable time to review/participate in its drafting, it and its ratification/official publishing would be the topic of the /next/ weeks CAB conf call... Whether or not one agrees with the content, the manner that this was accomplished leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. It is odd that, on the one hand, it is somehow OK for the SCM, Bug and community infrastructure stuff to be inaccessible and incomplete after almost 2 years, but that this, the first formal "referee decision" from the CAB/OGB ///had/// to be done in less than 48 hours. -1 on form. -John From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 07:24:58 2007 From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:24:58 +0100 Subject: Fwd: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> Message-ID: <200702081524.l18FOxfM007373@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> >The CAB could have simply released its draft in progress with >the comment that since its creation was rushed and not all the >CAB members had been given reasonable time to review/participate >in its drafting, it and its ratification/official publishing >would be the topic of the /next/ weeks CAB conf call... There was a two day notice (not 21 hour notice). We worked on the statement for the two days leading up to the meeting on wednesday. >Whether or not one agrees with the content, the manner that this >was accomplished leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. > >It is odd that, on the one hand, it is somehow OK for the SCM, >Bug and community infrastructure stuff to be inaccessible and >incomplete after almost 2 years, but that this, the first formal >"referee decision" from the CAB/OGB ///had/// to be done in less >than 48 hours. If we could achieve all that in 48 hours with 4 or 5 persons, then I'm sure it would have been done already. What do you expect the CAB to do about all that? The SCM roll-out internally at Sun is a large amount of work; none of which the CAB is involved in. Would a statement condeming the lack of SCM help move it forward as much as a statement about dual licensing might help people rethink? We also felt that there was a strong time pressure; to make a statement when confronted with a fait accompli does not nearly have the impact of making one before any decisions have been made public. I'm sorry that this leaves you with a sour taste in your mouth. Casper From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 07:54:58 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 09:54:58 -0600 (CST) Subject: Fwd: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, John Plocher wrote: > Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: >>> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. >> >> I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as soon as >> Al floated the CAB position paper. >> >> There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to prevent >> it from being overtaken by events. > > > The CAB could have simply released its draft in progress with > the comment that since its creation was rushed and not all the > CAB members had been given reasonable time to review/participate > in its drafting, it and its ratification/official publishing > would be the topic of the /next/ weeks CAB conf call... > > Whether or not one agrees with the content, the manner that this > was accomplished leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. > > It is odd that, on the one hand, it is somehow OK for the SCM, > Bug and community infrastructure stuff to be inaccessible and > incomplete after almost 2 years, but that this, the first formal > "referee decision" from the CAB/OGB ///had/// to be done in less > than 48 hours. > > -1 on form. > > -John I think mistakes were made on both sides, with one being a little bigger than the other: Given that a board member was missing and unaccounted for, the timing of the posting of a ratified opinion feels like an error to me. An OGB member not showing up and not checking in to see if a meeting was on (especially under these circumstances) feels like an error to me too. The 2nd seems a bit more heedless than the first though. Eric From webmink at sun.com Thu Feb 8 08:30:09 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:30:09 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <200702081107.l18B7r4L009831@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> References: <200702081107.l18B7r4L009831@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> Message-ID: <8B75E7FF-BDE1-449A-9E3C-C5A311F322CC@sun.com> On Feb 8, 2007, at 03:07, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > >> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. > > > I'm surprised you missed it, though, considering you had time for: I gave an interview last week, but I guess you realised that really. This week from Monday afternoon until Wednesday afternoon I was 100% committed to the Sun Analyst Conference in San Francisco. > > http://www.devxnews.com/article.php/3658526 > > and > > http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3658526 > > I'm having some issues with this quote: > > "Ultimately in each of those cases, Sun is the copyright holder > and > it is Sun that has to take the action," Phipps said. "So > ultimately > the decision is mine." That is factually true. The fact I would not dream of doing so independently of the community is also reflected in the article. S. From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 08:33:24 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:33:24 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> Message-ID: <16072E83-D9E4-4417-9191-08F6F693AD4A@Sun.COM> On Feb 8, 2007, at 07:54, Eric Boutilier wrote: > On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, John Plocher wrote: >> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: >>>> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. >>> I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as >>> soon as >>> Al floated the CAB position paper. >>> There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to >>> prevent >>> it from being overtaken by events. >> >> >> The CAB could have simply released its draft in progress with >> the comment that since its creation was rushed and not all the >> CAB members had been given reasonable time to review/participate >> in its drafting, it and its ratification/official publishing >> would be the topic of the /next/ weeks CAB conf call... >> >> Whether or not one agrees with the content, the manner that this >> was accomplished leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. >> >> It is odd that, on the one hand, it is somehow OK for the SCM, >> Bug and community infrastructure stuff to be inaccessible and >> incomplete after almost 2 years, but that this, the first formal >> "referee decision" from the CAB/OGB ///had/// to be done in less >> than 48 hours. >> >> -1 on form. >> >> -John > > > I think mistakes were made on both sides, with one being a > little bigger than the other: > > Given that a board member was missing and unaccounted for, > the timing of the posting of a ratified opinion feels like an > error to me. > > An OGB member not showing up and not checking in to see if a > meeting was on (especially under these circumstances) feels > like an error to me too. > > The 2nd seems a bit more heedless than the first though. Sorry, Eric, just completely outside my control. The conference venue in SF turned out to have lousy WiFi and Sun had my schedule booked absolutely solid preventing a trip to Starbucks during opening hours. Sometimes these things happen. Usually folk would have sufficient respect for one another for them not to become an issue. S. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2494 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 08:35:54 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:35:54 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> Message-ID: On Feb 8, 2007, at 04:37, Al Hopper wrote: > On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Simon Phipps wrote: > >> >> On Feb 8, 2007, at 00:16, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: >> >>> >>>> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. >>> >>> I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as >>> soon as >>> Al floated the CAB position paper. >>> >>> There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to >>> prevent >>> it from being overtaken by events. >> >> I was refuting Roy's assertion there was 2 days notice. I have no >> problem with the meeting, nor with the need to discuss in my absence. >> But I think waiting until next week to publish a position would have >> been both smart and respectful. >> > > There was very close to 2 days notice. See the bottom of this > included > message and the header timestamps: This was not the message that called the meeting. I clearly indicated in reply to your very first message that I had issues with drawing the conclusion that was being devised. S. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2494 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 08:40:31 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 10:40:31 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <16072E83-D9E4-4417-9191-08F6F693AD4A@Sun.COM> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> <16072E83-D9E4-4417-9191-08F6F693AD4A@Sun.COM> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Simon Phipps wrote: > > On Feb 8, 2007, at 07:54, Eric Boutilier wrote: > >> On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, John Plocher wrote: >>> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: >>>>> This meeting was scheduled at 21 hours notice, not two days. >>>> I think it was clear that the meeting was going to be held as soon as >>>> Al floated the CAB position paper. >>>> There was also a feeling that the CAB had to meet in order to prevent >>>> it from being overtaken by events. >>> >>> >>> The CAB could have simply released its draft in progress with >>> the comment that since its creation was rushed and not all the >>> CAB members had been given reasonable time to review/participate >>> in its drafting, it and its ratification/official publishing >>> would be the topic of the /next/ weeks CAB conf call... >>> >>> Whether or not one agrees with the content, the manner that this >>> was accomplished leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. >>> >>> It is odd that, on the one hand, it is somehow OK for the SCM, >>> Bug and community infrastructure stuff to be inaccessible and >>> incomplete after almost 2 years, but that this, the first formal >>> "referee decision" from the CAB/OGB ///had/// to be done in less >>> than 48 hours. >>> >>> -1 on form. >>> >>> -John >> >> >> I think mistakes were made on both sides, with one being a >> little bigger than the other: >> >> Given that a board member was missing and unaccounted for, >> the timing of the posting of a ratified opinion feels like an >> error to me. >> >> An OGB member not showing up and not checking in to see if a >> meeting was on (especially under these circumstances) feels >> like an error to me too. >> >> The 2nd seems a bit more heedless than the first though. > > Sorry, Eric, just completely outside my control. The conference venue in SF > turned out to have lousy WiFi and Sun had my schedule booked absolutely solid > preventing a trip to Starbucks during opening hours. Sometimes these things > happen. Usually folk would have sufficient respect for one another for them > not to become an issue. > > S. > As odd as this may sound, I actually think that for you the concerns of the OGB and the OpenSolaris community (especially under these circumstances) are a higher priority than the analyst conference. Believe it or not. Eric From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 09:53:29 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 09:53:29 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> <16072E83-D9E4-4417-9191-08F6F693AD4A@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <26DE8B05-9E11-4CB6-94C3-652B62A22CE6@Sun.COM> On Feb 8, 2007, at 08:40, Eric Boutilier wrote: > As odd as this may sound, I actually think that for you the > concerns of the OGB and the OpenSolaris community (especially > under these circumstances) are a higher priority than the > analyst conference. Believe it or not. Y'know, everyone says that in all the 18+ projects I am involved in - in the end I have multiple responsibilities and this situation was outside my control. You can blame me all you want for circumstances but I'll still assert that I'm unhappy with the path this has taken and the place it has reached. S. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2494 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 10:40:32 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 10:40:32 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> <16072E83-D9E4-4417-9191-08F6F693AD4A@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <45CB6EA0.9000500@sun.com> Hey, Eric Boutilier wrote: > As odd as this may sound, I actually think that for you the > concerns of the OGB and the OpenSolaris community (especially > under these circumstances) are a higher priority than the > analyst conference. Believe it or not. FWIW, I respectively disagree. I'd personally *much* rather Simon being available to talk to the various analysts about what Sun is up to in the open source world (if it wasn't already obvious) and various schmoozing network sessions involved. I'm rather surprised a decision was taken to rush this out, especially if there wasn't full agreement of the position of the OGB and the thread was dying out. Glynn From ian at ianshome.com Thu Feb 8 10:58:46 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:58:46 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45CB72E6.8050700@ianshome.com> Simon Phipps wrote: > Only just got on the net & picked this up (have been offline since > Mon) - are there minutes? A simple breakdown in communication has resulted in discord amongst the OGB members. Gents, may I suggest you exchange mobile numbers and who ever schedules a call sends a text to the others just to make sure you all know about calls? A quick call to a member who hasn't responded to the email or text would also be a good idea. Cheers, Ian From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 11:33:23 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:33:23 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <45CB6EA0.9000500@sun.com> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> <16072E83-D9E4-4417-9191-08F6F693AD4A@Sun.COM> <45CB6EA0.9000500@sun.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Glynn Foster wrote: > FWIW, I respectively disagree. > I'd personally *much* rather Simon being > available to talk to the various analysts about what Sun is up to in the open > source world (if it wasn't already obvious) and various schmoozing network > sessions involved. But I completely agree with you on the importance of Simon's role in that regard. What you said above is a bit askew of what I said. (i.e. a straw-man) > I'm rather surprised a decision was taken to rush this out, especially if there > wasn't full agreement of the position of the OGB and the thread was dying out. And of course that is also something on which we do not disagree. Eric From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 11:47:26 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:47:26 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CB72E6.8050700@ianshome.com> References: <45CB72E6.8050700@ianshome.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Ian Collins wrote: > > ... > Gents, may I suggest you exchange mobile numbers... > +1 to that. And by the way, my comments were based on an uninformed assumption that the OGB members already had each other's mobile numbers. So mea culpa for that. (I guess.) From sommerfeld at sun.com Thu Feb 8 12:04:36 2007 From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:04:36 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <1170965076.18202.1.camel@thunk> On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 10:46 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > Question 1: Do you approve the document, > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 > > for ... Using links to wikis in this sort of context makes me nervous since the content of the link target can be edited. In the real ballot, please link to a stable version... - Bill From Frank.Vanderlinden at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 12:28:54 2007 From: Frank.Vanderlinden at Sun.COM (Frank Van Der Linden) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:28:54 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CB72E6.8050700@ianshome.com> References: <45CB72E6.8050700@ianshome.com> Message-ID: <45CB8806.2000602@Sun.COM> Ian Collins wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: > > >> Only just got on the net & picked this up (have been offline since >> Mon) - are there minutes? >> > > A simple breakdown in communication has resulted in discord amongst the > OGB members. > Perhaps - though it seems that close to 48 hours was given, which would be enough to say "hold on, my schedule is full, and I think we should do this no sooner than next week". Also, it doesn't seem like any minds would change between now and next week. All arguments had been made, positions had been taken clearly by most people involved. I also understand the perception of urgency. I guess this is just all an exercise in decisionmaking, a mechanism that has been largely untested so far in the OpenSolaris community. That's the big issue. In this case, Sun, as the copyright holder, could legally push this through. But what if the community disagrees? And what exactly is the "community" and who is the voice of the community? This has been defined, but not really tested so far. This may be an important test. - Frank From sch at eng.sun.com Thu Feb 8 12:35:11 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:35:11 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <1170965076.18202.1.camel@thunk> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <1170965076.18202.1.camel@thunk> Message-ID: <20070208203511.GA2555@eng.sun.com> * Bill Sommerfeld [2007-02-08 12:04]: > On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 10:46 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > > > Question 1: Do you approve the document, > > > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 > > > > for ... > > Using links to wikis in this sort of context makes me nervous since the > content of the link target can be edited. > > In the real ballot, please link to a stable version... That's a good idea. Will do. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From johansen-osdev at sun.com Thu Feb 8 12:37:14 2007 From: johansen-osdev at sun.com (johansen-osdev at sun.com) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:37:14 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: <20070207224611.GB1806@eng.sun.com> <9A46A67A-97C1-4D28-BD5C-C45E77B8F105@sun.com> <506AC44C-4910-416D-924F-FD6BEF486AA1@gbiv.com> Message-ID: <20070208203714.GE24531@eng.sun.com> Gentlemen, > >>While the summary is reasonable, it is incomplete and the > >>conclusions and "decree" are one-sided. I'd suggest this sort of > >>kangaroo-court behaviour is unacceptable and I'd request that it > >>not be repeated. > > > >The OGB (or any deliberative body) cannot be hamstrung from action > >just because one of its members happens to be off-line without telling > >any of us. I don't expect the group to abdicate responsibility > >whenever > >I am not available, and neither should you. > > I disagree. While routine and urgent actions need to be taken in the > way you describe, the subject is too complex and sensitive to wind up > so hurriedly and the outcome smacks of a rush to judgement. While the > group was within its rights to act, common sense should have dictated > that a more considered approach be taken. I'm a recent addition to cab-discuss, so take my opinion for what it's worth. I'm not familiar with the intricacies of the CDDL/GPLv3 licensing arguments and I found the position paper difficult to understand. It seemed to me that adding more information to the paper would be of benefit to most readers. By adding detail about the arguments that were considered as part of the deliberations, uninformed readers can understand the rationale behind the stated position. This may also help eliminate the sense that the decision was rushed and one-sided. There was also at least one instance where the CAB position was unclear. In the bullet-point about FUD, it's easy to mistake what is written here as an attack upon all members of the minority that advocate dual licensing. It seems unlikely that every advocate of dual licensing is spreading FUD and seeking the demise of OpenSolaris. However, the paragraph seems to lump all proponents of dual licensing into the same cateogry. I'm suspicious that this isn't what was intended. Do you release drafts of position papers for review / editing prior to publication? Thanks, -j From fielding at gbiv.com Thu Feb 8 12:51:30 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:51:30 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9F6BF6A1-FDED-456A-ACCB-1C58C7455D82@gbiv.com> Simon, You know damn well that the OGB meeting is scheduled for EVERY Wednesday, at the same time, for the sake of dealing with OGB issues as they came up. This was agreed to by all of us. The decision was that it would *not* occur if there was nothing to discuss, not that it *would* occur if there was a separate notice sent to you by special delivery. We had to meet on Wednesday anyway to talk about the election schedule. You also know that Al wanted a concall on Wednesday, as he expressed to us on Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday. The fact that he was the only one able to put together an agenda and post it to the list is a reflection of his commitment to our open process, and none of had any idea that you would choose not to show up. I am not impressed by your selective quoting capacity. You also know that we agreed to hold OGB meetings based on a quorum, and that any business transacted at any meeting of the OGB is an act of the entire OGB. Your complaints presume that we are a board that must act on unanimity, which is simply not the case. Finally, the reason we have an OGB is to make decisions on behalf of the community in a timely manner, not so that you could pretend that an independent panel exists. You should be overjoyed that we decided to get off our collective ass and make a statement In short, we are the ones who are following the correct process, and your complaints are both absurd and damaging to the community. We chose to act without you being present because we had no idea why you were not present, and we presumed that your lack of attendance might have something to do with you not being Sun's stooge in this matter. In any case, nothing you could have said would have changed the outcome of that vote on Wednesday, and you are welcome to have us revisit the decision next week. In the mean time, learn this: Kangaroo Court is an American expression that is intended to make fun of, or disparage, the failure of due process in a conviction. This was only a decision, made according to due process, and you are behaving like we exist to serve your interests rather than the interests of OpenSolaris as a whole. Get over it. ....Roy From fielding at gbiv.com Thu Feb 8 12:53:33 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:53:33 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <1170965076.18202.1.camel@thunk> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <1170965076.18202.1.camel@thunk> Message-ID: <2BA0FF4A-6D77-441B-8608-B123C73FD162@gbiv.com> On Feb 8, 2007, at 12:04 PM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 10:46 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote: >> >> Question 1: Do you approve the document, >> >> http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/ >> OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 >> >> for ... > > Using links to wikis in this sort of context makes me nervous since > the > content of the link target can be edited. > > In the real ballot, please link to a stable version... Agreed -- it is time to move the document back to opensolaris.org. ....Roy From al at logical-approach.com Thu Feb 8 12:58:17 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 14:58:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft ballot? In-Reply-To: <2BA0FF4A-6D77-441B-8608-B123C73FD162@gbiv.com> References: <20070205184614.GB16635@eng.sun.com> <1170965076.18202.1.camel@thunk> <2BA0FF4A-6D77-441B-8608-B123C73FD162@gbiv.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Feb 8, 2007, at 12:04 PM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > > > On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 10:46 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote: > >> > >> Question 1: Do you approve the document, > >> > >> http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/ > >> OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 > >> > >> for ... > > > > Using links to wikis in this sort of context makes me nervous since > > the > > content of the link target can be edited. > > > > In the real ballot, please link to a stable version... > > Agreed -- it is time to move the document back to opensolaris.org. +1 Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From mo137222 at jurassic.sfbay.Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 13:00:13 2007 From: mo137222 at jurassic.sfbay.Sun.COM (Michelle Olson) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:00:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call - communication Message-ID: <200702082100.l18L0Dre939861@jurassic.eng.sun.com> I agree with Frank V and IMO, this is a test of the Consitution and Charter and we've found a legitimate gap, as follows: mo1: Article VI, section 1, Governing Board Powers, does not address requirement 2.1 of the OpenSolaris Charter. That is, the 'intended methods of communication between the OGB and SMI' are not defined. The relationship is clear, but methods of communication are missing. Last week, we also found some overlap, as follows: mo2: Article VIII, Community Group Voting Procedures, sections 8.3 and 8.4, Votes and Voting Systems. The procedures in this article are well defined, but different procedures are currently in use for Addition of Core Contributor and Initiate New Project. Thanks, Michelle >X-Original-To: CAB-Discuss at opensolaris.org >Delivered-To: CAB-Discuss at opensolaris.org >Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:28:54 +0100 >From: Frank Van Der Linden >Subject: Re: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call - communication >To: Ian Collins >MIME-version: 1.0 >Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT >User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Macintosh/20061207) >Cc: CAB Discuss >X-BeenThere: cab-discuss at opensolaris.org >X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 >List-Id: This list is used for general CAB discussion >List-Unsubscribe: , >List-Archive: >List-Post: >List-Help: >List-Subscribe: , > >Ian Collins wrote: >> Simon Phipps wrote: >> >> >>> Only just got on the net & picked this up (have been offline since >>> Mon) - are there minutes? >>> >> >> A simple breakdown in communication has resulted in discord amongst the >> OGB members. >> >Perhaps - though it seems that close to 48 hours was given, which would >be enough to say "hold on, my schedule is full, and I think we should do >this no sooner than next week". > >Also, it doesn't seem like any minds would change between now and next >week. All arguments had been made, positions had been taken clearly by >most people involved. I also understand the perception of urgency. > >I guess this is just all an exercise in decisionmaking, a mechanism that >has been largely untested so far in the OpenSolaris community. That's >the big issue. In this case, Sun, as the copyright holder, could legally >push this through. But what if the community disagrees? And what exactly >is the "community" and who is the voice of the community? This has been >defined, but not really tested so far. This may be an important test. > >- Frank > >_______________________________________________ >cab-discuss mailing list >cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Thu Feb 8 14:50:54 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 14:50:54 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CB8806.2000602@Sun.COM> References: <45CB72E6.8050700@ianshome.com> <45CB8806.2000602@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <20070208225054.GB18735@sun.com> On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 09:28:54PM +0100, Frank Van Der Linden wrote: > I guess this is just all an exercise in decisionmaking, a mechanism that > has been largely untested so far in the OpenSolaris community. That's > the big issue. In this case, Sun, as the copyright holder, could legally > push this through. But what if the community disagrees? And what exactly This is the difference between an advisory board and a governing board. As an advisor to Sun, the CAB had no authority to make any binding decisions, and its lack of legitimacy (indeed, lack of any real pretense of independence) offered the fledgling community no reason to support it. The CAB, with those drawbacks, was disbanded nearly a year ago. It no longer exists. There are no CAB members, no CAB meetings, and this list should be no longer be called cab-discuss. In its place, with the force of a grant of independent powers in the form of the charter, we have the OGB. For a variety of reasons, the Initial OGBs have lacked legitimacy in that they have been appointed rather than elected. That too will soon change. But in all other ways, the OGB we have today is no different from the one we will have after elections. Its chartered job is to govern. Not to advise, not to lobby. It is not a lower house and its decisions are, generally, not subject to review by Sun or anyone else who is not a voting member. The decisions of the OGB as they relate to the OpenSolaris community are binding. Sun, by virtue of copyright ownership, is free to grant additional licenses to OpenSolaris code under whatever terms it sees fit. That does not mean such a decision need be accepted or adopted by the OpenSolaris community, nor does it invalidate or revoke existing licenses. In such a scenario, the OGB - presumably with popular mandate - could in effect create a license-based fork of exactly the type described in the position paper. But that fork would in fact be the main fork, by virtue of the OGB's position of leadership. Obviously, only an OGB secure in its power and with the full confidence of the community, would take such an action. But under those circumstances, it would effectively nullify Sun's choice by keeping developmers unified behind the CDDL-only "fork"[0]. That is not to say Sun's hypothetical choice would be free of consequences, but - and this is the key - the only people who would be making (other-license)-only contributions would never have been members of the OGB-governed community anyway; thus, even in the absence of dual-licensing, those contributions would never have been available to us anyway. Please do not mistake this for support of GPLv3 or any other dual licensing scheme. I don't wish to conflate that argument with the matter actually at hand here, which is the nature of the OGB. A strong, community-backed *governing* board leads, steers, and decides. That board must be secure in its authority, cognizant of its limitations, and sufficiently inclusive to retain the overwhelming backing of the community as a whole. Such an OGB offers both much-needed community leadership and an effective counterweight to Sun's position. Both the structure of the charter and the name of the organization were chosen to reflect the desire for just such a body. The point of my description above is not that dual licensing is beneficial or even harmless; it is to emphasize that an effective OGB could, simply by existing, limit the actions Sun would be willing to take. A weak OGB backed by a few factions of a divided community, even if consulted by Sun, would have little ability to drive the decision - and all of the negative consequences which have been discussed at length would be much more severe regardless of the choice Sun eventually makes. As with any young entity, the OGB we have today lacks most of these characteristics. What we're seeing here is a product mainly of the OGB's lack of security, a feeling well-justified by its appointed status and the challenges we face in bootstrapping ourselves into self-governance. That insecurity led to a real fear that Sun would announce a decision before the OGB could act, and that the OGB would not have the capital to oppose it. That fear, given the current level of community cohesion, is entirely justified and would most surely be borne out if Sun were to take such a premature action. One would hope that Sun would wait until an elected OGB has taken office and established itself to bring a set of formal questions about licensing before the board, where they could be properly debated with the full set of facts. Whether or not Sun chooses to do this is outside the OGB's control. But as OGB nominations open, I'd humbly suggest that we all consider very carefully how we expect the OGB to operate - not only when other actors cooperate but also when they are hostile. How shall the OGB achieve the kind of community cohesion necessary? How shall it engage with Sun and other vendors? Perhaps most importantly, what steps should the OGB take to focus discussion and *decision* on highly controversial matters? The OGB we have today has, despite the best of intentions, been ineffective in its answers to these questions. I say this without malice toward its members; the fact merely reflects the immaturity of the board as an entity and the challenging conditions under which it has operated. Nevertheless, the events of the past several weeks illustrate the questions we as a community must answer about ourselves. My hope is that the personal animosity, justified or not, will rapidly fade away and be replaced by constructive commentary on these more central issues. Right or wrong, what's done is done. It can be debated, revised, revoked, or replaced, but only in a context that supports both the process of doing so and the result. So what next? [0] Presumably Sun would compel its engineers to contribute under both licenses, but no one is under any obligation to retain both of them when redistributing. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 15:17:44 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:17:44 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <9F6BF6A1-FDED-456A-ACCB-1C58C7455D82@gbiv.com> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> <9F6BF6A1-FDED-456A-ACCB-1C58C7455D82@gbiv.com> Message-ID: <751E24D1-4E06-47FD-BA7C-5DD80EDF5FA8@Sun.COM> I don't want to discuss this any more here since not only are my objections not being heard, I am being accused of malpractice simply for voicing them. I do want to call an OGB meeting for next week to discuss the progress of the elections. I have a very busy day but will reserve the necessary hour for it. On Feb 8, 2007, at 12:51, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > In any case, nothing you could have said > would have changed the outcome of that vote on Wednesday, I'm sorry to hear that. I feel it justifies my choice of words. s. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2494 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 15:45:37 2007 From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 00:45:37 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <751E24D1-4E06-47FD-BA7C-5DD80EDF5FA8@Sun.COM> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> <9F6BF6A1-FDED-456A-ACCB-1C58C7455D82@gbiv.com> <751E24D1-4E06-47FD-BA7C-5DD80EDF5FA8@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <200702082345.l18NjbOe009896@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> >> In any case, nothing you could have said >> would have changed the outcome of that vote on Wednesday, > >I'm sorry to hear that. I feel it justifies my choice of words. There was a discussion on licensing which lasted around 10 days; this is when and how we all determined how we felt the OGB should react. Pray tell, Simon, which arguments would you have brought to the table that would have swayed us during the meeting? Why have you been holding them back from the public discussion? Or are you saying that because the outcome was known beforehand this was somehow bad? I would say predictability of outcomes is the very hallmark of democratic assemblies. Casper From fielding at gbiv.com Thu Feb 8 16:03:50 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 16:03:50 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: <751E24D1-4E06-47FD-BA7C-5DD80EDF5FA8@Sun.COM> References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <93FA84A4-4C33-41F3-9E05-1D47D6EB01C6@Sun.COM> <9F6BF6A1-FDED-456A-ACCB-1C58C7455D82@gbiv.com> <751E24D1-4E06-47FD-BA7C-5DD80EDF5FA8@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <69C70411-6489-400C-BD55-0D013AA76CFF@gbiv.com> On Feb 8, 2007, at 3:17 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > On Feb 8, 2007, at 12:51, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> In any case, nothing you could have said >> would have changed the outcome of that vote on Wednesday, > > I'm sorry to hear that. I feel it justifies my choice of words. No, it just means you are in the minority of a rather obvious case. The difference is that rather than objecting to the content of the decision, you are objecting to the process and accusing us of malicious intent. It is you who owe us an apology, and if you'd get off your high horse for a minute then maybe you'd realize it. ....Roy From fielding at gbiv.com Thu Feb 8 17:53:23 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:53:23 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <20070208225054.GB18735@sun.com> References: <45CB72E6.8050700@ianshome.com> <45CB8806.2000602@Sun.COM> <20070208225054.GB18735@sun.com> Message-ID: <742F3E5E-1768-4CAE-A56C-E023CF53BEE7@gbiv.com> While it is nice that there is renewed interest in OpenSolaris governance just in time for the ratification vote and the next OGB election, I think it would be better if folks did not try to read too much into this one event. No matter what the issue, we are five individuals and we do actually respect each other quite a bit. If Simon wants to find out what happened at the meeting from a third-party, then he should ask Stephen for an unbiased review -- there is no reason to assume that we intended any disrespect just because four of us decided to take action. From my perspective, there have been times when Sun marketing has moved in a certain direction without properly consulting the CAB/OGB. To the extent that they are talking about gray areas or newly released projects, that's fine. But, when they start talking about strategic directions for OpenSolaris (not Solaris), and justify it by tossing chum onto a public forum and then saying the subscription list *is* the community, it pretty much says to the world that the Core Contributor election process is a sham. That *will* piss me off, since we just finished a long process of defining how we want the community to make decisions. I think Sun wants that document to be in effect, which is why Sun ratified it, but I don't think everyone has figured out the appropriate protocols yet on how to apply OpenSolaris governance in real life. I don't expect that to happen right away, but we do need to act when things get out of hand. On Feb 8, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > In its place, with the force of a grant of independent powers in the > form of the charter, we have the OGB. For a variety of reasons, the > Initial OGBs have lacked legitimacy in that they have been appointed > rather than elected. That too will soon change. But in all other > ways, the OGB we have today is no different from the one we will have > after elections. Its chartered job is to govern. Not to advise, not > to lobby. It is not a lower house and its decisions are, generally, > not subject to review by Sun or anyone else who is not a voting > member. The decisions of the OGB as they relate to the OpenSolaris > community are binding. Somewhat binding, but, more importantly, it is our *responsibility* now to act. There is no one else, at least not until we get the voting mechanism ready and capable of handling initiatives. Sun has given us this responsibility. > Sun, by virtue of copyright ownership, is free to grant additional > licenses to OpenSolaris code under whatever terms it sees fit. That > does not mean such a decision need be accepted or adopted by the > OpenSolaris community, nor does it invalidate or revoke existing > licenses. In such a scenario, the OGB - presumably with popular > mandate - could in effect create a license-based fork of exactly the > type described in the position paper. But that fork would in fact be > the main fork, by virtue of the OGB's position of leadership. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Anyone could create a fork of the code, but that would split the community who happens to work for Sun from the community at large. Nobody wants that. Our decision wasn't about securing power or fear of Sun making a decision by fiat. I think it was about process and place, and specifically a realization that a campaign was being conducted on one of *our* mailing lists in a way that was inconsistent with *our* governance responsibility and demonstrably harmful to the productivity of those few people still subscribed to that list. I lost two days of work to that discussion alone, and that was just spent reading the archives and writing one response. If the same question had been raised on cab-discuss and then presented in a way that could be reasonably considered by the real OpenSolaris community, then we might have even used it as a test poll for the voting tool. I can only hope that this will cause more people to want to be nominated to the OGB for the upcoming election, and maybe for some folks inside Sun to seriously consider who they will want to be in this position for the next misunderstanding. I won't be here, and I know others will pass on being nominated as well, so it will be important for the real leaders of the community to step up and take control of their own project's well-being. ....Roy From garrett at damore.org Thu Feb 8 12:13:29 2007 From: garrett at damore.org (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:13:29 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call In-Reply-To: References: <200702080816.l188GYjo013985@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45CB3CF1.8050400@Sun.Com> <16072E83-D9E4-4417-9191-08F6F693AD4A@Sun.COM> <45CB6EA0.9000500@sun.com> Message-ID: <45CB8469.6090803@damore.org> Gosh, as an external observer to this, I'm surprised at the amount of discord this decision caused. Or maybe not the decision itself, but how the decision is reached. It sounds to me like OGB needs some basic procedures/rules to ensure that everyone gets a fair chance at representation, and that it is also not hamstrung by scheduling conflicts with an individual member. Much of this is already covered by the Constitution, but I think some improvements can be made: Insert the following after 5.10 (Voting) "Matters to be brought before the membership shall be described (e-mail, or otherwise) in summary form at least ten (10) days prior to the meeting. An exception to this rule is permitted when it would not otherwise be reasonably possible to provide such notice, in which case the notice shall be provided as timely as possible. In the event that the notice is less than seven (7) days in advance of a meeting, any vote pertaining to the matter, other than to defer, shall require no fewer votes than would be required if every Member eligible to vote on the matter were present and voted. Ten (10) days prior to any meeting the list of matters for consideration shall be sent to the membership." And similarly for the OGB (by which I think the CAB should be bound), add the following after 6.8: "Matters to be brought before the OGB shall be described (e-mail, or otherwise) in summary form at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting. An exception to this rule is permitted when it would not otherwise be reasonably possible to provide such notice, in which case the notice shall be provided as timely as possible. In the event that the notice is less than seven (7) days in advance is not given, any vote pertaining to the matter, other than to defer, shall require no fewer than three-fourths (3/4) of the votes of the OGB membership to pass. Essentially, the intention would be to ensure that at least a simple majority (or 3/4, arbitrarily, for the OGB) vote of _all_ members is required when sufficient advance notice of a matter is not provide, without hamstringing the OGB or the membership from acting. -- Garrett Eric Boutilier wrote: > On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Glynn Foster wrote: >> FWIW, I respectively disagree. I'd personally *much* rather Simon being >> available to talk to the various analysts about what Sun is up to in >> the open >> source world (if it wasn't already obvious) and various schmoozing >> network >> sessions involved. > > But I completely agree with you on the importance of Simon's > role in that regard. What you said above is a bit askew of > what I said. (i.e. a straw-man) > >> I'm rather surprised a decision was taken to rush this out, >> especially if there >> wasn't full agreement of the position of the OGB and the thread was >> dying out. > > And of course that is also something on which we do not disagree. > > Eric > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From maurizio.teli at soc.unitn.it Thu Feb 8 18:42:09 2007 From: maurizio.teli at soc.unitn.it (Maurizio Teli) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:42:09 PST Subject: [cab-discuss] My Research: new website Message-ID: <6341715.1170988959644.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Dear All, as you know I'm carrying on my PhD research in sociology about the OpenSolaris community. I'm glad to announce you that my new webstie is online: http://www.maurizioteli.eu/ Here you can find a new summary of my PhD research aim and everything I wrote about the OpenSolaris project. My dissertation is ongoing, so I hope to be able to publish soon new papers or chapters. Thanks to everyone involved in the OpenSolaris project, it is a wonderful context for social research. Maurizio This message posted from opensolaris.org From mike.kupfer at sun.com Thu Feb 8 19:42:01 2007 From: mike.kupfer at sun.com (Mike Kupfer) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:42:01 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Section 6.4 parse error Message-ID: <29673.1170992521@athyra> I was reviewing the Constitution (draft 3) and have a couple question. The first one is below; I'll send out the others as separate mails. Section 6.4 contains Furthermore, an affirmative vote of a majority of the Members of record expressing "no confidence" in the current OGB, or an act by the entire OGB to resign from office, shall have the effect of... Seems like there's something missing between "entire OGB" and "to resign from office". What should that sentence say? mike From mike.kupfer at sun.com Thu Feb 8 19:45:12 2007 From: mike.kupfer at sun.com (Mike Kupfer) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:45:12 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] revoking an expulsion Message-ID: <29685.1170992712@athyra> Sections 3.6 and 4.4 say that an expulsion can be reversed, but I didn't see any description of how. In particular, I'm wondering if another 2/3 vote is needed, or if a simple majority will do. mike From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Thu Feb 8 19:45:36 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:45:36 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Section 6.4 parse error In-Reply-To: <29673.1170992521@athyra> References: <29673.1170992521@athyra> Message-ID: <45CBEE60.2070501@tadpole.com> Mike Kupfer wrote: > I was reviewing the Constitution (draft 3) and have a couple question. > The first one is below; I'll send out the others as separate mails. > > Section 6.4 contains > > Furthermore, an affirmative vote of a majority of the Members of > record expressing "no confidence" in the current OGB, or an act by > the entire OGB to resign from office, shall have the effect of... > > Seems like there's something missing between "entire OGB" and "to resign > from office". What should that sentence say? > > mike > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org > Parses okay to me -- an act ... to resign from office... Though, it may be clearer to use more direct language: ... or the resignation of the entire OGB from office, shall .... parses a bit more clearly. -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From mike.kupfer at sun.com Thu Feb 8 20:01:02 2007 From: mike.kupfer at sun.com (Mike Kupfer) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 20:01:02 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] parliamentary procedure and IRC Message-ID: <29729.1170993662@athyra> Okay, last question. Section 5.1 talks about using IRC (or something like it), and about using parliamentary procedure. I'm having some trouble imagining how this will work. I guess we could use "voice" to control who can "speak". Would members use direct messaging to the chair to request recognition? mike From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Thu Feb 8 22:03:28 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 22:03:28 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Section 6.4 parse error In-Reply-To: <45CBEE60.2070501@tadpole.com> References: <29673.1170992521@athyra> <45CBEE60.2070501@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <3B12BBE9-9577-4751-86EF-F6E3B6D16452@Sun.COM> On Feb 8, 2007, at 19:45, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Mike Kupfer wrote: >> I was reviewing the Constitution (draft 3) and have a couple >> question. >> The first one is below; I'll send out the others as separate mails. >> >> Section 6.4 contains >> >> Furthermore, an affirmative vote of a majority of the Members of >> record expressing "no confidence" in the current OGB, or an >> act by >> the entire OGB to resign from office, shall have the effect of... >> >> Seems like there's something missing between "entire OGB" and "to >> resign >> from office". What should that sentence say? >> >> mike > > > Parses okay to me -- an act ... to resign from office... > > Though, it may be clearer to use more direct language: > > ... or the resignation of the entire OGB from office, shall .... > > parses a bit more clearly. > > -- > Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer > Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, > General Dynamics C4 Systems > http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ > Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 Yes, that was what was meant. S. From Alan.Burlison at sun.com Fri Feb 9 04:42:26 2007 From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 04:42:26 PST Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <742F3E5E-1768-4CAE-A56C-E023CF53BEE7@gbiv.com> Message-ID: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> > From my perspective, there have been times when Sun marketing > as moved in a certain direction without properly consulting > the CAB/OGB. To the extent that they are talking about gray areas > or newly released projects, that's fine. But, when they start > talking about strategic directions for OpenSolaris (not Solaris), > and justify it by tossing chum onto a public forum and then > saying the subscription list *is* the community, it pretty much > says to the world that the Core Contributor election process > is a sham. Were any of the OGB members (besides Simon) aware of this meeing? http://blogs.sun.com/barton808/entry/opensolaris_to_3_or_not I realise that Sun retains the copyright of OpenSolaris (and therefore the right to determine licensing terms), but I would have assumed that the OGB should have been involved with any discussions with the FSF - or is that outside their remit? This message posted from opensolaris.org From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Fri Feb 9 07:34:35 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:34:35 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <7313904E-A675-40E3-92AA-6AD8EE29BD17@Sun.COM> On Feb 9, 2007, at 04:42, Alan Burlison wrote: >> From my perspective, there have been times when Sun marketing >> as moved in a certain direction without properly consulting >> the CAB/OGB. To the extent that they are talking about gray areas >> or newly released projects, that's fine. But, when they start >> talking about strategic directions for OpenSolaris (not Solaris), >> and justify it by tossing chum onto a public forum and then >> saying the subscription list *is* the community, it pretty much >> says to the world that the Core Contributor election process >> is a sham. > > Were any of the OGB members (besides Simon) aware of this meeing? > > http://blogs.sun.com/barton808/entry/opensolaris_to_3_or_not > > I realise that Sun retains the copyright of OpenSolaris (and > therefore the right to determine licensing terms), but I would have > assumed that the OGB should have been involved with any discussions > with the FSF - or is that outside their remit? This is among the feedback I'm waiting to bring verbally to the OGB - the call was part of a series we've had with the FSF as part of Sun's broader relationship with them and is one of the reasons I've been able to indicate here that I know they would be positive. I'd assume that if this were ever an actual proposal we'd see a more formal meeting of the OGB with the FSF's leaders. S. From al at logical-approach.com Fri Feb 9 08:34:36 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:34:36 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: > > From my perspective, there have been times when Sun marketing > > as moved in a certain direction without properly consulting > > the CAB/OGB. To the extent that they are talking about gray areas > > or newly released projects, that's fine. But, when they start > > talking about strategic directions for OpenSolaris (not Solaris), > > and justify it by tossing chum onto a public forum and then > > saying the subscription list *is* the community, it pretty much > > says to the world that the Core Contributor election process > > is a sham. > > Were any of the OGB members (besides Simon) aware of this meeing? > > http://blogs.sun.com/barton808/entry/opensolaris_to_3_or_not It comes as a complete surprise to me. And its gratifying to see that Suns OpenSolaris marketing people are privy to such meetings, while the OGB community representatives get to find out about it well after the fact. I'm interested in seeing John Plochers' assessment of this behavior - in terms of how he rates it as good or bad form. Let's add this as an agenda to next weeks CAB/OGB conf call. PS: Who on earth is Barton George? I can't even find a single mention of him (or her) on OpenSolaris.Org. I just checked several hundred megabytes of archived OpenSolaris postings at Logical (thanks to ZFS) and ... no .. no mention of the name. Perhaps his/her _first_ contribution to OpenSolaris will be related to changing the licensing terms of the project. [... reformatted slightly ...] > I realise that Sun retains the copyright of OpenSolaris (and therefore > the right to determine licensing terms), but I would have assumed that > the OGB should have been involved with any discussions with the FSF - or > is that outside their remit? That would be my *assumption* also! Alan - thanks for this very informative post. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From Alan.Burlison at sun.com Fri Feb 9 10:00:18 2007 From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:00:18 +0000 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <45CCB6B2.2080009@sun.com> Al Hopper wrote: > PS: Who on earth is Barton George? I can't even find a single mention of > him (or her) on OpenSolaris.Org. He reports to Simon, I believe. -- Alan Burlison -- From rich.teer at rite-group.com Fri Feb 9 10:15:42 2007 From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 10:15:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: > Were any of the OGB members (besides Simon) aware of this meeing? > > http://blogs.sun.com/barton808/entry/opensolaris_to_3_or_not Speaking personally, the email to which I'm replying was the first I heard of this meeting. > I realise that Sun retains the copyright of OpenSolaris (and > therefore the right to determine licensing terms), but I would have Agreed. > assumed that the OGB should have been involved with any discussions > with the FSF - or is that outside their remit? Again, speaking personally, in my opinion the CAB/OGB should very much be involved in those discussions. Yes, Simon was there, so one could say that the OGB had representation, but as far as I'm aware, there was no invite to the OGB as an entity. I guess what I'm saying is that Simon being the only OGB member invited to (or even notified about) the meeting is completely different to the OGB as a whole being invitied and us electing to have Simon represent us. To be clear: this isn't intended to cast Simon (nor anyone else for that matter) in a bad light--I like and respect him too much to do that. I prefer to think of it a stumble as we navigate our way through uncharted territory. It's not the first stumble, and I doubt it'll be the last. The important thing is to learn from it so that it won't (hopefully) be repeated in future. -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Fri Feb 9 11:26:29 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:26:29 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] parliamentary procedure and IRC In-Reply-To: <29729.1170993662@athyra> References: <29729.1170993662@athyra> Message-ID: <20070209192629.GA866@sun.com> On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 08:01:02PM -0800, Mike Kupfer wrote: > Okay, last question. > > Section 5.1 talks about using IRC (or something like it), and about > using parliamentary procedure. I'm having some trouble imagining how > this will work. I guess we could use "voice" to control who can > "speak". Would members use direct messaging to the chair to request > recognition? For what it's worth, the gentoo managers meetings used to take place on IRC and used a few different methods depending on the context. They had invite-only channels for the closed sessions, moderated channels for regular public meetings, and then the meeting channel would be unmoderated after the meeting to allow general discussion. This seemed to work pretty well. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Fri Feb 9 11:29:04 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:29:04 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <45CCCB80.1020406@Sun.Com> Al Hopper wrote: > I'm interested in seeing John Plochers' assessment of this behavior - in > terms of how he rates it as good or bad form. -1e06 on form. :-( You guys are saints compared to this :-) I am absolutely appalled at this. Pissed off. Disappointed. Frustrated. Now let me tell you how I really feel! Obviously, I /am/ concerned about how we ourselves manage ourselves. Thus my previous comments about the form of our decicion making processes. That whole thread, though, is an internal squabble within our community. Compared to this, though, it really doesn't matter. Announcements at an analysts conference, private meetings with the FSF. Press releases. All coming /before/ the OGB was ever formally involved in the conversation, and /after/ it was obvious that the community was skeptical at best about the idea. This high handed behavior by Sun's Management disappoints me - it implies that they do not consider that the OpenSolaris community, thru the OGB, to be a key stakeholder in this arena. It is /EXACTLY/ this behavior (saying one thing publicly, then going off and doing something to undermine it) that has created the pervasive distrust OF Sun in the open source community. This cancerous feeling that, under the public posturing, there is a hidden subversive agenda. These anouncements, press releases and blogs all seem to say that someone /else/ is effectively pretending to speak for us. In some sense, the tables are turned. First, we have the OGB speaking without Simon. Now, we seem to have Simon speaking without the OGB. It would be humorous if it wasn't so disruptive to our community. Both of these issues /are/ related. The CAB/OGB has so far been virtually invisible, ineffective and irrelevant. Sun still has no clue as to how they need to be interacting with the OpenSolaris community. The community itself is disorganized and frustrated. If there was ONE thing that the OGB could /do/ with the rest of its term, it would be to fix this disconnect and get itself inserted into these pre-decision making dialogs that Jonathan and Rich are having. On whatever topics de-jour that are relevant. We need you, the OGB, to figure out how to give our community seat, voice and vote in those discussions. -John From webmink at sun.com Fri Feb 9 11:46:20 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:46:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <9BC4188D-846D-477E-805E-03A273490E73@sun.com> On Feb 9, 2007, at 08:34, Al Hopper wrote: > On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: >> Were any of the OGB members (besides Simon) aware of this meeing? >> >> http://blogs.sun.com/barton808/entry/opensolaris_to_3_or_not > > It comes as a complete surprise to me. And its gratifying to see that > Suns OpenSolaris marketing people are privy to such meetings, while > the > OGB community representatives get to find out about it well after the > fact. > > I'm interested in seeing John Plochers' assessment of this behavior > - in > terms of how he rates it as good or bad form. > > Let's add this as an agenda to next weeks CAB/OGB conf call. > > PS: Who on earth is Barton George? I can't even find a single > mention of > him (or her) on OpenSolaris.Org. I just checked several hundred > megabytes > of archived OpenSolaris postings at Logical (thanks to ZFS) and ... > no .. > no mention of the name. Perhaps his/her _first_ > contribution to > OpenSolaris will be related to changing the licensing terms of the > project. Before folk go blow a fuse here, note that Sun has and is entitled to a relationshiop with FSF and is not negotiating on anyone's behalf here. Data, however, is good. > > [... reformatted slightly ...] > >> I realise that Sun retains the copyright of OpenSolaris (and >> therefore >> the right to determine licensing terms), but I would have assumed >> that >> the OGB should have been involved with any discussions with the >> FSF - or >> is that outside their remit? > > That would be my *assumption* also! > Alan - thanks for this very informative post. As I indicated in my earlier e-mail, this is how I knew they would be generally positive, and I'm quite ready to report verbally to the OGB on the content. I am not ready to have another public flame-fest, however. S. From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Fri Feb 9 12:01:28 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 12:01:28 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Vote list Message-ID: <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> I can't vote. :) Please do not let Rich off the hook on this one. It was also pointed out that Juergen Keil also isn't on the list. Any support for adding these 2 guys? Glynn From al at logical-approach.com Fri Feb 9 13:43:02 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 15:43:02 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] project creation Message-ID: OGB members, We discussed deferring OGB decisions on Project creation to the newly elected OGB in order to clear our "inboxes" and give priority to the upcoming OGB election management and oversight - but I don't think that we voted (officially) on it. I would like to take a vote on it via email (if possible) and, assuming the motion is passed, communicate this to opensolaris-discuss - where there is ongoing thread on this topic in progress. Obviously the discussions should continue - but I don't want the community to assume a (quick) OGB decision is forthcoming. MOTION To defer an OBG decision on new Projection creation criteria for the newly appointed OGB to determine is hereby made by Al Hopper: Need a 2nd and an up/down vote please. PS: This can also be deferred to next weeks meeting if an OGB member would prefer to discuss it further. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From sch at eng.sun.com Fri Feb 9 15:16:20 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 15:16:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Vote list In-Reply-To: <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> References: <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070209231620.GA5320@eng.sun.com> * Glynn Foster [2007-02-09 15:03]: > I can't vote. :) > > Please do not let Rich off the hook on this one. It was also pointed out that > Juergen Keil also isn't on the list. Any support for adding these 2 guys? The Tools community group mailed me to add Rich to their Core Contributor ranks. I'm not sure how to fix ON's leads, which are the present CRT advocates. Jurgen would be sensible there, or as an "at-large" Core Contributor. (I'm not sure about other community groups.) - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From mike.kupfer at Sun.COM Fri Feb 9 15:29:31 2007 From: mike.kupfer at Sun.COM (Mike Kupfer) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:29:31 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Vote list In-Reply-To: Message from Glynn Foster of "Fri, 09 Feb 2007 12:01:28 PST." <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> Message-ID: <9471.1171063771@athyra> >>>>> "Glynn" == Glynn Foster writes: Glynn> I can't vote. :) Glynn> Please do not let Rich off the hook on this one. Well, Rich has certainly contributed a lot to the Tools community, so he gets my support if he wants it. mike From al at logical-approach.com Fri Feb 9 15:50:10 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 17:50:10 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Vote list In-Reply-To: <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> References: <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Glynn Foster wrote: > I can't vote. :) > > Please do not let Rich off the hook on this one. It was also pointed out that > Juergen Keil also isn't on the list. Any support for adding these 2 guys? Yes - but I got my hand slapped at the last OGB meeting[1] for conferring core contributor status to those who requested it, without first establishing standards and procedures to do so. Juergen Keil and Rich Lowe, please forward a brief email to cab-discuss with the following Subject: line: request to be recognized as a core contributor with a list of your contributions to OpenSolaris, and we'll act on it after a discussion at the next OGB meeting. After this meeting concludes, we'll publish guidelines (to opensolaris-discuss) for how this mechanism will work. Note that this mechanism is only an interim mechanism in order to boot-strap the initial OGB election. After the new OGB is in place, the Constitution defines how this is handled. Also, for the record, I won't be accepting nomination for the new OGB - so there cannot be an issue with me "stuffing the ballot box" as it were. [1] Stephen Hahn is working on publishing the minutes from the last meeting. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From roland.mainz at nrubsig.org Fri Feb 9 15:52:03 2007 From: roland.mainz at nrubsig.org (Roland Mainz) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:52:03 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] List of members, 2/7 References: <20070207195322.GA1500@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45CD0923.372A689C@nrubsig.org> Stephen Hahn wrote: > Today's version has the recent OGB additions, plus a few other > corrections. There are 241 core contributors. > > My next step is to do a final cleaning and then upload into the > contributor table, with an initial date of today, which we'll reset > after ratification (to the ratification date). > > We can continue to refresh the lists, but I'll do it using the table > at that point. > Name: 0-070207-plain.txt > 0-070207-plain.txt Type: Plain Text (text/plain) > Encoding: 8bit Could you please add April Chin (opensolaris.org username "chin") for the ksh93 project, please ? ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Fri Feb 9 16:21:57 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:21:57 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <9BC4188D-846D-477E-805E-03A273490E73@sun.com> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <9BC4188D-846D-477E-805E-03A273490E73@sun.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Simon Phipps wrote: > > ... > ... I am not ready to have another public flame-fest, however... And let THAT be the final arrow. No, wait, let THIS be the final arrow. No wait... :-) From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Fri Feb 9 18:08:32 2007 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:08:32 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Vote list In-Reply-To: <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> References: <45CCD318.4030304@sun.com> Message-ID: On Feb 9, 2007, at 12:01, Glynn Foster wrote: > I can't vote. :) > > Please do not let Rich off the hook on this one. It was also > pointed out that > Juergen Keil also isn't on the list. Any support for adding these 2 > guys? Yes, agreed. They should go on the list. S. From webmink at sun.com Fri Feb 9 18:12:08 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:12:08 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CCB6B2.2080009@sun.com> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45CCB6B2.2080009@sun.com> Message-ID: On Feb 9, 2007, at 10:00, Alan Burlison wrote: > Al Hopper wrote: > >> PS: Who on earth is Barton George? I can't even find a single >> mention of >> him (or her) on OpenSolaris.Org. > > He reports to Simon, I believe. Barton manages Sun's relationship with the FSF and set this call up as part of a series of calls. When I finally get the chance to discuss this verbally with the rest of the OGB I'll be suggesting Barton also set up a similar meeting for the OGB with Peter if people are interested in having that happen. S. From webmink at sun.com Fri Feb 9 18:13:49 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:13:49 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] project creation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1F60676D-0C61-4BFE-A732-47FE800098D3@sun.com> On Feb 9, 2007, at 13:43, Al Hopper wrote: > MOTION To defer an OBG decision on new Projection creation criteria > for > the newly appointed OGB to determine is hereby made by Al Hopper: > > Need a 2nd and an up/down vote please. I second and agree. I actually believe the only business the current OGB should conduct is the Constitution ratification and OGB election. S. From webmink at sun.com Fri Feb 9 18:22:27 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:22:27 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CCCB80.1020406@Sun.Com> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45CCCB80.1020406@Sun.Com> Message-ID: On Feb 9, 2007, at 11:29, John Plocher wrote: > In some sense, the tables are turned. First, we have the OGB speaking > without Simon. Now, we seem to have Simon speaking without the OGB. > It would be humorous if it wasn't so disruptive to our community. I respectfully disagree; the actions are not equivalent. I was not and am not negotiating on the behalf of Sun or the OGB. In particular I did not take any action binding on Sun or the OGB. The meeting was useful as it confirmed forcefully that the FSF is well-disposed towards OpenSolaris. I have already communicated the outcome of this meeting to the community in earlier e-mails and intend to report verbally to the OGB next week in much more detail. No-one has been excluded - rather, the opportunity for the OGB to now consult with the FSF if it chooses has been created. As part of my job I routinely meet all sorts of people, including the FSF, and seek advice on many topics. I will continue to do so since I am most definitely not the smartest person around here and need the advice of anyone with insight. S. From jim.grisanzio at sun.com Sat Feb 10 15:16:26 2007 From: jim.grisanzio at sun.com (Jim Grisanzio) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:16:26 PST Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <20070208225054.GB18735@sun.com> Message-ID: <727304.1171149416571.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> >There are > no CAB members, no > CAB meetings, and this list should be no longer be > called cab-discuss. Thanks for the reminder. You're right. We'll be happy to create a new list for the OGB (ogb-discuss?) and move the subscribers over. We should probably time this for the election. I'm not sure if we can migrate the archives over to the new list, though, but I'll check with Derek. Also, we'll need the name or names of the people the OGB wants to manage the new list (handling spam, addressing usage policies, etc). The old CAB pages should all be updated, too, but all current OGB members have access to them and can change them at any time. Jim This message posted from opensolaris.org From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Sun Feb 11 08:42:45 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:42:45 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <727304.1171149416571.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> References: <727304.1171149416571.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <45CF4785.7020303@sun.com> Hey, Jim Grisanzio wrote: >> There are >> no CAB members, no >> CAB meetings, and this list should be no longer be >> called cab-discuss. > > Thanks for the reminder. You're right. We'll be happy to create a new list > for the OGB (ogb-discuss?) and move the subscribers over. We should probably > time this for the election. I'm not sure if we can migrate the archives over > to the new list, though, but I'll check with Derek. It should be easily possible, but I'd advise not doing that. I think the idea of creating a new ogb-discuss sounds like a good idea though, and deprecating cab-discuss. I'd also like to see ogb at opensolaris.org, a privately archived list for the board members to use. We have board at gnome.org as a way of organizing meeting agendas, airing our dirty laundry, and any sensitive issues about financials or sponsor requests. Of course, meeting minutes get sent to a public list, along with anything else that effects the membership. It's a pretty effective way of being able to pass the baton on to a new set of people each year, since they can benefit from previous years experience through the private archives. Glynn From sch at eng.sun.com Sun Feb 11 09:58:12 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 09:58:12 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CF4785.7020303@sun.com> References: <727304.1171149416571.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45CF4785.7020303@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070211175812.GC8701@eng.sun.com> * Glynn Foster [2007-02-11 09:51]: > Jim Grisanzio wrote: > >> There are no CAB members, no CAB meetings, and this list should be > >> no longer be called cab-discuss. > > > > Thanks for the reminder. You're right. We'll be happy to create a new list > > for the OGB (ogb-discuss?) and move the subscribers over. We should probably > > time this for the election. I'm not sure if we can migrate the archives over > > to the new list, though, but I'll check with Derek. > > It should be easily possible, but I'd advise not doing that. I think > the idea of creating a new ogb-discuss sounds like a good idea though, > and deprecating cab-discuss. I'd also like to see ogb at opensolaris.org, > a privately archived list for the board members to use. (It is possible to rename aliases in Mailman, so we have lots of choices.) > We have board at gnome.org as a way of organizing meeting agendas, airing > our dirty laundry, and any sensitive issues about financials or > sponsor requests. Of course, meeting minutes get sent to a public > list, along with anything else that effects the membership. It's a > pretty effective way of being able to pass the baton on to a new set > of people each year, since they can benefit from previous years > experience through the private archives. Can you give a pointer to a description of how the private archives are implemented? - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From webmink at sun.com Sun Feb 11 12:00:39 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:00:39 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CF4785.7020303@sun.com> References: <727304.1171149416571.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45CF4785.7020303@sun.com> Message-ID: On Feb 11, 2007, at 08:42, Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > Jim Grisanzio wrote: >>> There are >>> no CAB members, no >>> CAB meetings, and this list should be no longer be >>> called cab-discuss. >> >> Thanks for the reminder. You're right. We'll be happy to create a >> new list >> for the OGB (ogb-discuss?) and move the subscribers over. We >> should probably >> time this for the election. I'm not sure if we can migrate the >> archives over >> to the new list, though, but I'll check with Derek. > > It should be easily possible, but I'd advise not doing that. I > think the idea of > creating a new ogb-discuss sounds like a good idea though, and > deprecating > cab-discuss. I'd also like to see ogb at opensolaris.org, a privately > archived list > for the board members to use. I would completely agree with this, yes. Maintaining corporate memory is very important, we have already as the CAB/OGB had cause to recall why we took earlier decisions and an archive of the (infrequently used but important when it is) private list would be very valuable. S. From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Sun Feb 11 17:36:20 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 17:36:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <20070211175812.GC8701@eng.sun.com> References: <727304.1171149416571.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45CF4785.7020303@sun.com> <20070211175812.GC8701@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45CFC494.8060306@sun.com> Hey, Stephen Hahn wrote: >> We have board at gnome.org as a way of organizing meeting agendas, airing >> our dirty laundry, and any sensitive issues about financials or >> sponsor requests. Of course, meeting minutes get sent to a public >> list, along with anything else that effects the membership. It's a >> pretty effective way of being able to pass the baton on to a new set >> of people each year, since they can benefit from previous years >> experience through the private archives. > > Can you give a pointer to a description of how the private archives > are implemented? Don't think it's terribly complicated - private archives that members get access to, don't advertise it as a list that people can subscribe to, and admin gets all subscribe/unsubscribe notifications. You could probably be a little bit more anal about it, but I don't believe it's necessary. Glynn From Stephen.Harpster at Sun.COM Mon Feb 12 08:16:33 2007 From: Stephen.Harpster at Sun.COM (Stephen Harpster) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 08:16:33 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45CCCB80.1020406@Sun.Com> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45CCCB80.1020406@Sun.Com> Message-ID: <45D092E1.7000904@sun.com> You, like most of the rest of the community, have misconstrued what all of this was about. I simply asked the community what they think about a dual-license. Simon and I then asked the FSF and RedMonk what they think about a dual-license. "What do you think of this idea?" It's a simple question. Gathering data. We are not trying to take control. We are not trying to displace the OGB. You guys are reading WAAAAY too much into all of this. John Plocher wrote: > Al Hopper wrote: >> I'm interested in seeing John Plochers' assessment of this behavior - in >> terms of how he rates it as good or bad form. > > > -1e06 on form. :-( You guys are saints compared to this :-) > > I am absolutely appalled at this. Pissed off. Disappointed. > Frustrated. > Now let me tell you how I really feel! > > Obviously, I /am/ concerned about how we ourselves manage ourselves. > Thus my previous comments about the form of our decicion making > processes. That whole thread, though, is an internal squabble > within our community. > > Compared to this, though, it really doesn't matter. > > Announcements at an analysts conference, private meetings with the FSF. > Press releases. All coming /before/ the OGB was ever formally involved > in the conversation, and /after/ it was obvious that the community was > skeptical at best about the idea. This high handed behavior by Sun's > Management disappoints me - it implies that they do not consider that > the OpenSolaris community, thru the OGB, to be a key stakeholder in > this arena. > > It is /EXACTLY/ this behavior (saying one thing publicly, then going off > and doing something to undermine it) that has created the pervasive > distrust OF Sun in the open source community. This cancerous feeling > that, > under the public posturing, there is a hidden subversive agenda. > > These anouncements, press releases and blogs all seem to say that > someone /else/ is effectively pretending to speak for us. > > In some sense, the tables are turned. First, we have the OGB speaking > without Simon. Now, we seem to have Simon speaking without the OGB. > It would be humorous if it wasn't so disruptive to our community. > > Both of these issues /are/ related. The CAB/OGB has so far been > virtually invisible, ineffective and irrelevant. Sun still has no clue > as to how they need to be interacting with the OpenSolaris community. > The community itself is disorganized and frustrated. > > If there was ONE thing that the OGB could /do/ with the rest of its > term, it would be to fix this disconnect and get itself inserted into > these pre-decision making dialogs that Jonathan and Rich are having. On > whatever topics de-jour that are relevant. We need you, the OGB, to > figure out how to give our community seat, voice and vote in those > discussions. > > -John > > > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org -- Stephen Harpster Director, Open Source Software Sun Microsystems, Inc. From sommerfeld at sun.com Mon Feb 12 09:36:36 2007 From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:36:36 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication In-Reply-To: <45D092E1.7000904@sun.com> References: <28251021.1171024976608.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45CCCB80.1020406@Sun.Com> <45D092E1.7000904@sun.com> Message-ID: <1171301796.13981.14.camel@thunk> On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 08:16 -0800, Stephen Harpster wrote: > You, like most of the rest of the community, have misconstrued what all > of this was about. > > I simply asked the community what they think about a dual-license. > Simon and I then asked the FSF and RedMonk what they think about a > dual-license. "What do you think of this idea?" It's a simple > question. Gathering data. We are not trying to take control. We are > not trying to displace the OGB. > > You guys are reading WAAAAY too much into all of this. I don't think we are. In a newly-founded organization when the roles are unclear it's quite common for such misunderstandings about "chain of command" to fester, leading to really toxic interactions further down the line. The best way to avoid it is for people who might be mistaken for being in a leadership role -- but who aren't -- to adhere strictly to the official chain of command to avoid any misunderstanding, and for them to defer to the actual leadership. In short, it's best if you don't surprise the OGB with stuff like this in the future. - Bill From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Mon Feb 12 09:50:48 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 09:50:48 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? Message-ID: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> Has anyone giving any thought to the procedure for nominations for the OGB elections? How does one nominate a candidate (other than self-nomination, which Gman seems to have done by fiat accompli)? How does a candidate accept or decline a nomination? While everyone is focused on OGB elections, I think we need to address this interim step first. (If this is already addressed on opensolaris-discuss somewhere, then I apologize, but also respectfully request details be posted to -announce -- with the high volume of mail on -discuss not everyone can follow along. :-) -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 12 11:32:16 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 11:32:16 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft minutes, 2007/02/07 Message-ID: <20070212193215.GA9290@eng.sun.com> Corrections/amendments, please. - Stephen ---- OpenSolaris GOVERNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES, 2007/02/07 Attending: DIK, FIELDING, HOPPER, TEER. Absent: PHIPPS. Guests: Stephen Hahn 1. Agenda reordered to allow discussion of draft position statement on dual licensing. 2. Members discussed draft language of position paper. Discussion covered points being emphasized, document structure. HOPPER took corrections in terminology and language. 3. Hahn gave an update on the current Contributor/Core Contributor lists. Also pointed Board members to Glynn Foster's draft announcement at http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolarisElectionDraft with a request to read and offer corrections. 4. Hahn gave a brief overview of proposed voting software implementation. Noted that there was an opportunity to test software with an earlier ballot. A short discussion of questions that might be asked followed. 5. A discussion of the third point on the agenda, "OGB leadership", was held. DIK and Hahn both commented that current Board activities, around the dual licensing issue and other topics, appeared to show that the Board was leading in areas where no single Community Group would be the natural forum. 6. The discussion moved to a treatment of petitions for Core Contributor status recently approved by the OGB as "at large" Core Contributors. Hahn expressed a concern that a successor Board would be able to draw no guidance from the current process, and wondered if more direction could be given to the petitoner's appropriate Community Group and its failure to handle their case. FIELDING commented that the assessment of contributions needed to be balanced, and more than participation as an interested observer. HOPPER agreed that the Board should handle requests via consensus. A general desire to see a petitioner's record of contribution was expressed. 7. HOPPER presented the corrected position paper for a brief reading Motion: to adopt the CAB/OGB Position Paper 20070207 version 0.6 proposed by HOPPER, seconded by TEER. Motion carried 4 - 0. 8. Adjourned. -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Mon Feb 12 12:22:20 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:22:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Has anyone giving any thought to the procedure for nominations for the > OGB elections? > > How does one nominate a candidate (other than self-nomination, which > Gman seems to have done by fiat accompli)? > > How does a candidate accept or decline a nomination? I accept my nomination too ;) You're absolutely right though - the procedure wasn't clear at all, which is why I blogged rather than writing a mail. I would suggest each candidate to email a summary to opensolaris-announce with the following Name: Email: Afffiliation: then include a 120 word summary, along with some details of why they want to run for the OGB and what their goals for the year might be. Glynn From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 12 12:42:55 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 12:42:55 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> * Glynn Foster [2007-02-12 12:22]: > > > Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > Has anyone giving any thought to the procedure for nominations for the > > OGB elections? > > > > How does one nominate a candidate (other than self-nomination, which > > Gman seems to have done by fiat accompli)? > > > > How does a candidate accept or decline a nomination? > > I accept my nomination too ;) > > You're absolutely right though - the procedure wasn't clear at all, > which is why I blogged rather than writing a mail. > > I would suggest each candidate to email a summary to > opensolaris-announce with the following > > Name: > Email: > Afffiliation: > > then include a 120 word summary, along with some details of why they > want to run for the OGB and what their goals for the year might be. How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a two-in-one like Glynn's. Like: I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement follows. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Mon Feb 12 13:09:30 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:09:30 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> Hey, Stephen Hahn wrote: > How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? > I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a > two-in-one like Glynn's. > > Like: > > I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core > Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe > that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful > represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement > follows. So, I worry about doing this, because it may mean that we get a ton of Core Contributors nominating all sorts of people without the actual candidate themselves *wanting* to go for the OGB. That's why I prefer the candidate sending the mail, because it implies they're actually passionate about the OGB and the responsibility being undertaken (you'd hope). Perhaps a follow up message from a Core Contributor is better? Shrug. Glynn From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Mon Feb 12 13:18:16 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:18:16 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D0D998.10600@tadpole.com> Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > Stephen Hahn wrote: > >> How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? >> I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a >> two-in-one like Glynn's. >> >> Like: >> >> I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core >> Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe >> that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful >> represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement >> follows. >> > > So, I worry about doing this, because it may mean that we get a ton of Core > Contributors nominating all sorts of people without the actual candidate > themselves *wanting* to go for the OGB. That's why I prefer the candidate > sending the mail, because it implies they're actually passionate about the OGB > and the responsibility being undertaken (you'd hope). > > Perhaps a follow up message from a Core Contributor is better? Shrug. > I think we need a two step process here. First we get the nominations, which could be automated via some process. e.g. member logs in to a web server and submits a list of open solaris logins they are nominating. I don't think we have a limitation on the number nominations that one can make, so the only enforcement is to ensure that the nominator is a Member. After that, the candidates should be polled as to whether they accept or decline the nomination. (Perhaps this can be assumed in self-nomination, but I'm not sure. Someone may want to withdraw from the race at some point, and that should be permitted.) Once the nominating process is final, candidates should be allowed to send a single candidacy to the -announce list, but that step should also be optional. -- Garrett -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From stevel at sun.com Mon Feb 12 13:17:13 2007 From: stevel at sun.com (Stephen Lau) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:17:13 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D0D959.8040409@sun.com> Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > Stephen Hahn wrote: >> How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? >> I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a >> two-in-one like Glynn's. >> >> Like: >> >> I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core >> Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe >> that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful >> represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement >> follows. > > So, I worry about doing this, because it may mean that we get a ton of Core > Contributors nominating all sorts of people without the actual candidate > themselves *wanting* to go for the OGB. That's why I prefer the candidate > sending the mail, because it implies they're actually passionate about the OGB > and the responsibility being undertaken (you'd hope). > > Perhaps a follow up message from a Core Contributor is better? Shrug. > > > Glynn > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org On the other hand there are some good candidates who might not nominate themselves (for many reasons: shyness, culturalisms, etc.). -steve -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development From ian at ianshome.com Mon Feb 12 13:19:59 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:19:59 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D0D9FF.8020100@ianshome.com> Glynn Foster wrote: >Hey, > >Stephen Hahn wrote: > > >> How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? >> I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a >> two-in-one like Glynn's. >> >> Like: >> >> I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core >> Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe >> that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful >> represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement >> follows. >> >> > >So, I worry about doing this, because it may mean that we get a ton of Core >Contributors nominating all sorts of people without the actual candidate >themselves *wanting* to go for the OGB. That's why I prefer the candidate >sending the mail, because it implies they're actually passionate about the OGB >and the responsibility being undertaken (you'd hope). > >Perhaps a follow up message from a Core Contributor is better? Shrug. > > > Or a second from a Core Contributor? Ian. From sch at eng.sun.com Mon Feb 12 13:55:36 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:55:36 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0D9FF.8020100@ianshome.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> <45D0D9FF.8020100@ianshome.com> Message-ID: <20070212215535.GA9767@eng.sun.com> * Ian Collins [2007-02-12 13:20]: > Glynn Foster wrote: > > >Hey, > > > >Stephen Hahn wrote: > > > > > >> How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? > >> I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a > >> two-in-one like Glynn's. > >> > >> Like: > >> > >> I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core > >> Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe > >> that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful > >> represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement > >> follows. > > > >So, I worry about doing this, because it may mean that we get a ton > >of Core Contributors nominating all sorts of people without the > >actual candidate themselves *wanting* to go for the OGB. That's why I > >prefer the candidate sending the mail, because it implies they're > >actually passionate about the OGB and the responsibility being > >undertaken (you'd hope). I was sort of assuming that the candidate and the Core Contributor had had a rendezvous and an agreement, rather than having surprise nominations. > >Perhaps a follow up message from a Core Contributor is better? Shrug. > Or a second from a Core Contributor? I would settle for a second, if we don't think we can get to a combined message. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Mon Feb 12 14:32:44 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:32:44 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <20070212215535.GA9767@eng.sun.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> <45D0D9FF.8020100@ianshome.com> <20070212215535.GA9767@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45D0EB0C.9010106@tadpole.com> Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Ian Collins [2007-02-12 13:20]: > >> Glynn Foster wrote: >> >> >>> Hey, >>> >>> Stephen Hahn wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? >>>> I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a >>>> two-in-one like Glynn's. >>>> >>>> Like: >>>> >>>> I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core >>>> Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe >>>> that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful >>>> represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement >>>> follows. >>>> >>> So, I worry about doing this, because it may mean that we get a ton >>> of Core Contributors nominating all sorts of people without the >>> actual candidate themselves *wanting* to go for the OGB. That's why I >>> prefer the candidate sending the mail, because it implies they're >>> actually passionate about the OGB and the responsibility being >>> undertaken (you'd hope). >>> > > I was sort of assuming that the candidate and the Core Contributor had > had a rendezvous and an agreement, rather than having surprise > nominations. > I'm not entirely sure this will have occurred. And, speaking for myself at least, I would feel a lot better about running if I thought at least _one_ person other than myself had decided to nominate me. I am not entirely certain, but I suspect I'm not alone amongst other potential candidates. Also, we might find candidates which might be convinced to run who might not otherwise have thought of themselves as such, once they were nominated. I just feel like the whole nomination process needs to be a little less ad-hoc. Actually, if all the members have suitable public keys registered (which I think they need in order to vote anyway), we could just have members sign an e-mail indicating their nomination and send it to a public list. I think, though, there might be some value in having nominations be anonymous, which is why I suggested a web form initially. There are much more sophisticated ways we could do this, and I'm willing to help out with that, if there is consensus that we need it. I suspect that at this early stage it doesn't have to be quite so formalized. -- Garrett > >>> Perhaps a follow up message from a Core Contributor is better? Shrug. >>> > > >> Or a second from a Core Contributor? >> > > I would settle for a second, if we don't think we can get to a > combined message. > > - Stephen > > -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From bill at rushmores.net Mon Feb 12 14:51:51 2007 From: bill at rushmores.net (Bill Rushmore) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:51:51 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0EB0C.9010106@tadpole.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> <45D0D9FF.8020100@ianshome.com> <20070212215535.GA9767@eng.sun.com> <45D0EB0C.9010106@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45D0EF87.8020500@rushmores.net> Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > I'm not entirely sure this will have occurred. And, speaking for myself > at least, I would feel a lot better about running if I thought at least > _one_ person other than myself had decided to nominate me. I am not > entirely certain, but I suspect I'm not alone amongst other potential > candidates. > > Any candidate worth running should be able to go to any forum be able to post a message and will easily find someone to nominate them. I know I wouldn't have an issue of nominating you, for example, if you posted a message asking for someone to nominate you. > Also, we might find candidates which might be convinced to run who might > not otherwise have thought of themselves as such, once they were nominated. > > I agree totally there. I have seen it before with user groups I have been a part of. I think many people aren't going to want to seek out the extra burden but can be very easily convinced by someone else that they are needed by the community. Bill rushmores.net From johansen-osdev at sun.com Mon Feb 12 15:05:25 2007 From: johansen-osdev at sun.com (johansen-osdev at sun.com) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:05:25 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination procedure? In-Reply-To: <45D0EB0C.9010106@tadpole.com> References: <45D0A8F8.8080702@tadpole.com> <45D0CC7C.1050509@sun.com> <20070212204255.GA9629@eng.sun.com> <45D0D78A.30605@sun.com> <45D0D9FF.8020100@ianshome.com> <20070212215535.GA9767@eng.sun.com> <45D0EB0C.9010106@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <20070212230525.GO17083@eng.sun.com> Is there a per election limit to the number of individuals a core contributor may nominate? -j On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 02:32:44PM -0800, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Stephen Hahn wrote: > > * Ian Collins [2007-02-12 13:20]: > > > >> Glynn Foster wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Hey, > >>> > >>> Stephen Hahn wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> How do we know if a candidate has a nominating Core Contributor? > >>>> I would suggest that the nominator send the message, unless it's a > >>>> two-in-one like Glynn's. > >>>> > >>>> Like: > >>>> > >>>> I'm happy to nominate [ ] for Governing Board. I'm a Core > >>>> Contributor to the [ ] Community Group, and fervently believe > >>>> that [ ] has the talent and time necessary to be a successful > >>>> represenatative of the OpenSolaris Community. [ ]'s statement > >>>> follows. > >>>> > >>> So, I worry about doing this, because it may mean that we get a ton > >>> of Core Contributors nominating all sorts of people without the > >>> actual candidate themselves *wanting* to go for the OGB. That's why I > >>> prefer the candidate sending the mail, because it implies they're > >>> actually passionate about the OGB and the responsibility being > >>> undertaken (you'd hope). > >>> > > > > I was sort of assuming that the candidate and the Core Contributor had > > had a rendezvous and an agreement, rather than having surprise > > nominations. > > > > I'm not entirely sure this will have occurred. And, speaking for myself > at least, I would feel a lot better about running if I thought at least > _one_ person other than myself had decided to nominate me. I am not > entirely certain, but I suspect I'm not alone amongst other potential > candidates. > > Also, we might find candidates which might be convinced to run who might > not otherwise have thought of themselves as such, once they were nominated. > > I just feel like the whole nomination process needs to be a little less > ad-hoc. > > Actually, if all the members have suitable public keys registered (which > I think they need in order to vote anyway), we could just have members > sign an e-mail indicating their nomination and send it to a public > list. I think, though, there might be some value in having nominations > be anonymous, which is why I suggested a web form initially. > > There are much more sophisticated ways we could do this, and I'm willing > to help out with that, if there is consensus that we need it. I suspect > that at this early stage it doesn't have to be quite so formalized. > > -- Garrett > > > >>> Perhaps a follow up message from a Core Contributor is better? Shrug. > >>> > > > > > >> Or a second from a Core Contributor? > >> > > > > I would settle for a second, if we don't think we can get to a > > combined message. > > > > - Stephen > > > > > > > -- > Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer > Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, > General Dynamics C4 Systems > http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ > Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 > > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Tue Feb 13 09:27:02 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:27:02 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB/OGB website content needs to be updated In-Reply-To: <11028448.1171360944885.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> References: <11028448.1171360944885.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <45D1F4E6.2050101@Sun.Com> It is amazingly difficult to find up to date info about the current state of the OGB and its governance on the OpenSolaris homepage. The page for Governance/CAB doesn't /appear/ to have been updated in a year (the last weekly minutes/notes on meetings are from before the launch in 2005, the wording on the page is all about the old CAB and not the OGB, the left navbar has nothing more recent on it than the 1st CAB meeting...) If you get past this feeling that you are on a stale page and click on the OpenSolaris Constitution link, you find links to drafts, with no context, timelines or commentary - nothing to indicate what is happening. How would a random OpenSolaris community member find out that elections are being planned for sometime in the next month and that nominations are being accepted for a new OGB? Where would they find the minutes from past OGB/CAB meetings? What about formal votes/position papers and the like? It is not just /Sun/ that seems to prefer to do things in the dark :-) -John Shawn Walker wrote: >> Cool, and where is the draft constitution? > > I suspect you're looking for this: > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Governance_Draft_03 > > -Shawn > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss at opensolaris.org From al at logical-approach.com Tue Feb 13 10:53:05 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:53:05 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] CAB/OGB website content needs to be updated In-Reply-To: <45D1F4E6.2050101@Sun.Com> References: <11028448.1171360944885.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> <45D1F4E6.2050101@Sun.Com> Message-ID: On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, John Plocher wrote: > It is amazingly difficult to find up to date info about the current state > of the OGB and its governance on the OpenSolaris homepage. > > The page for Governance/CAB doesn't /appear/ to have been updated in a year > (the last weekly minutes/notes on meetings are from before the launch in 2005, > the wording on the page is all about the old CAB and not the OGB, the > left navbar has nothing more recent on it than the 1st CAB meeting...) > > If you get past this feeling that you are on a stale page and click on > the OpenSolaris Constitution link, you find links to drafts, with no > context, timelines or commentary - nothing to indicate what is happening. > > How would a random OpenSolaris community member find out that elections > are being planned for sometime in the next month and that nominations > are being accepted for a new OGB? Where would they find the minutes from > past OGB/CAB meetings? What about formal votes/position papers and the > like? > > It is not just /Sun/ that seems to prefer to do things in the dark :-) Agreed - we need to do much better. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From al at logical-approach.com Wed Feb 14 09:30:36 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:30:36 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] this weeks OGB meeting Message-ID: I'd like to invite Stephen Hahn to attend (as usual) this weeks meeting, unless others object? Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From rich.teer at rite-group.com Wed Feb 14 09:33:52 2007 From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:33:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] this weeks OGB meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Al Hopper wrote: > I'd like to invite Stephen Hahn to attend (as usual) this weeks meeting, > unless others object? No objections from me. SOMEONE has to take the minutes and referee the fisticuffs! :-) Are still shooting for Thusday at Noon Pacific? -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich From webmink at sun.com Wed Feb 14 09:38:17 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:38:17 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] this weeks OGB meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Feb 14, 2007, at 09:33, Rich Teer wrote: > On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Al Hopper wrote: > >> I'd like to invite Stephen Hahn to attend (as usual) this weeks >> meeting, >> unless others object? > > No objections from me. SOMEONE has to take the minutes and referee > the fisticuffs! :-) Fine with me. Stephen, remember to bring the first-aid box ;-) > > Are still shooting for Thusday at Noon Pacific? Thursday noon PST, yes. I do hope no shooting is involved. S. From stevel at sun.com Wed Feb 14 16:00:20 2007 From: stevel at sun.com (Stephen Lau) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:00:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination Message-ID: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> gratuituous play on an Austin powers quote: "Allow myself to nominate.... myself" I doth[1] hereby declare myself a candidate for the OGB elections, following the precedent set by Glynn[2]. Unlike Glynn, I don't have the experience of being involved in the GNOME foundation. I do, however, share the willingness to take part in, and help lead the OpenSolaris community. I am, as has been shown on many an occasion, fully willing to also take blame for various opensolaris.org breakage - which I think is an important part of being a leader. ;-) I'm part of the OpenSolaris engineering team, so I'm paid by Sun to make OpenSolaris not suck. Unlike Glynn, I have built my own kernel. It panic'd upon boot. cheers, steve [1] Like the way I combined the first person "I" with the third person singular present tense? [2] http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/09022007 -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development From stevel at sun.com Wed Feb 14 16:16:27 2007 From: stevel at sun.com (Stephen Lau) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:16:27 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D3A65B.1050505@sun.com> It has been pointed out to me that following Glynn & Garrett's emails in the 'nomination procedure?' thread, the correct protocol is to get a second or +1 from a core contributor. Fortunately, I am a core contributor - so I second my nomination. Apparently, I'm supposed to also then accept the nomination. So I do hereby accept the self-nomination so graciously posited (and subsequently seconded) by myself. For good measure, I also +1/second Glynn's nomination ;-) I'm done sending non-sensical emails now. cheers, steve Stephen Lau wrote: > gratuituous play on an Austin powers quote: > "Allow myself to nominate.... myself" > > I doth[1] hereby declare myself a candidate for the OGB elections, > following the precedent set by Glynn[2]. Unlike Glynn, I don't have the > experience of being involved in the GNOME foundation. I do, however, > share the willingness to take part in, and help lead the OpenSolaris > community. I am, as has been shown on many an occasion, fully willing > to also take blame for various opensolaris.org breakage - which I think > is an important part of being a leader. ;-) I'm part of the > OpenSolaris engineering team, so I'm paid by Sun to make OpenSolaris not > suck. > > Unlike Glynn, I have built my own kernel. > It panic'd upon boot. > > cheers, > steve > > [1] Like the way I combined the first person "I" with the third person > singular present tense? > [2] http://www.gnome.org/~gman/blog/09022007 -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development From ian at ianshome.com Wed Feb 14 16:38:49 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:38:49 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3A65B.1050505@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3A65B.1050505@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D3AB99.6090108@ianshome.com> Stephen Lau wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that following Glynn & Garrett's emails > in the 'nomination procedure?' thread, the correct protocol is to get > a second or +1 from a core contributor. > > Fortunately, I am a core contributor - so I second my nomination. > > Apparently, I'm supposed to also then accept the nomination. > > So I do hereby accept the self-nomination so graciously posited (and > subsequently seconded) by myself. > > For good measure, I also +1/second Glynn's nomination ;-) > > I'm done sending non-sensical emails now. > The ability to spout total bollocks with a straight face is an essential requirement for any candidate for high office. Ian From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Wed Feb 14 16:42:50 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:42:50 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3A65B.1050505@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3A65B.1050505@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D3AC8A.7090004@sun.com> Stephen Lau wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that following Glynn & Garrett's emails in > the 'nomination procedure?' thread, the correct protocol is to get a > second or +1 from a core contributor. > > Fortunately, I am a core contributor - so I second my nomination. > > Apparently, I'm supposed to also then accept the nomination. > > So I do hereby accept the self-nomination so graciously posited (and > subsequently seconded) by myself. Not that Steve needs a 2nd nomination, but I think he'd be an absolutely *awesome* member to have on the OGB - he deeply cares about the project and the community around him, and that's shown in all his work over the last couple of years. Rocking! Glynn From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM Wed Feb 14 17:45:46 2007 From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:45:46 +0900 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3AC8A.7090004@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3A65B.1050505@sun.com> <45D3AC8A.7090004@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D3BB4A.8090802@Sun.COM> +1 for Glynn +1 for Steve :) Glynn Foster wrote On 02/15/07 09:42,: > > Stephen Lau wrote: > >>It has been pointed out to me that following Glynn & Garrett's emails in >>the 'nomination procedure?' thread, the correct protocol is to get a >>second or +1 from a core contributor. >> >>Fortunately, I am a core contributor - so I second my nomination. >> >>Apparently, I'm supposed to also then accept the nomination. >> >>So I do hereby accept the self-nomination so graciously posited (and >>subsequently seconded) by myself. > > > Not that Steve needs a 2nd nomination, but I think he'd be an absolutely > *awesome* member to have on the OGB - he deeply cares about the project and the > community around him, and that's shown in all his work over the last couple of > years. > > Rocking! > > > Glynn > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Wed Feb 14 20:40:27 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:40:27 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> Message-ID: <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Okay, now that precedent seems well and truly set, I will declare that: 1) I nominate myself for an OGB position. 2) I accept said nomination. 3) I offer the following position statement: I am an employee of a SPARC OEM partner, where I work on Solaris and OpenSolaris (as well as other embedded products). I also have contributed to OpenSolaris in a personal capacity. I've worked with Solaris since 2.5. My expertise is kernel software, especially device drivers, cryptography, mobile platform support, and networking (802.3 and 802.11 in particular). I've had my hand in various other bits as well. I have built kernels, many of which panic, and many of which don't. Some of which have made other people panic. I also was responsible for suggesting the name of a Sun product which is the Greek word for "panic". (I also wrote the kernel software for said product.) I've contributed code to a number of Open Source projects over the years. My position on Open Solaris is that I want to continue to contribute and innovate, and enable others to do so. I want to avoid things that would fracture the community, or forking the project. I want to continue to enable business to build solutions on the Open Solaris platform. For this reason I'm somewhat opposed to GPL or other licenses that are viral in nature for components that are part of the core platform. (The kernel and critical supporting software, for example.) I want to try to work with hardware vendors to get them to recognize the benefit of providing "first class" and "first party" support for OpenSolaris with their products. 4) I'd also like to nominate the following persons for OGB leadership, but I have no idea if they are interested in the said positions (hopefully I spelled all the names right -- apologies if I have not). I also don't know if there is any limit on how many nominations I can make, so here's my full list, in no particular order: * Alan Coopersmith * Jurgen Keil * Joerg Schily * Rich Lowe * Alan DuBoff * Casper Dik * Bill Sommerfeld I'd be happy to see any of the above named persons elected to the OGB. Again, no idea how many of them are interested in it. -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Thu Feb 15 08:44:08 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 08:44:08 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <20070215164408.GB6771@sun.com> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 08:40:27PM -0800, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Okay, now that precedent seems well and truly set, I will declare that: > > 1) I nominate myself for an OGB position. > 2) I accept said nomination. As a core contributor, I'd like to second and confirm your nomination. Thanks for your continuing interest and participation. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Thu Feb 15 09:17:18 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:17:18 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45D4959E.3090502@Sun.Com> Could someone on the CAB/OGB please collect these nomination writeups and post them on a "Candidate BIOs for the upcoming OGB Elections" Page under the CAB/Governance community? It would be good to have a single place to find information relating to the upcoming elections. This would also be a great place to put the dates for the various happenings (nominations, elections, ...) so we all are on the same page going forwards. -John Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Okay, now that precedent seems well and truly set, I will declare that: > > 1) I nominate myself for an OGB position. > 2) I accept said nomination. > 3) I offer the following position statement: > > I am an employee of a SPARC OEM partner, where I work on Solaris and > OpenSolaris (as well as other embedded products). I also have > contributed to OpenSolaris in a personal capacity. I've worked with > Solaris since 2.5. > > My expertise is kernel software, especially device drivers, > cryptography, mobile platform support, and networking (802.3 and 802.11 > in particular). I've had my hand in various other bits as well. > > I have built kernels, many of which panic, and many of which don't. > Some of which have made other people panic. I also was responsible for > suggesting the name of a Sun product which is the Greek word for > "panic". (I also wrote the kernel software for said product.) > > I've contributed code to a number of Open Source projects over the years. > > My position on Open Solaris is that I want to continue to contribute and > innovate, and enable others to do so. I want to avoid things that would > fracture the community, or forking the project. I want to continue to > enable business to build solutions on the Open Solaris platform. For > this reason I'm somewhat opposed to GPL or other licenses that are viral > in nature for components that are part of the core platform. (The > kernel and critical supporting software, for example.) I want to try to > work with hardware vendors to get them to recognize the benefit of > providing "first class" and "first party" support for OpenSolaris with > their products. > > 4) I'd also like to nominate the following persons for OGB leadership, > but I have no idea if they are interested in the said positions > (hopefully I spelled all the names right -- apologies if I have not). I > also don't know if there is any limit on how many nominations I can > make, so here's my full list, in no particular order: > > * Alan Coopersmith > * Jurgen Keil > * Joerg Schily > * Rich Lowe > * Alan DuBoff > * Casper Dik > * Bill Sommerfeld > > I'd be happy to see any of the above named persons elected to the OGB. > Again, no idea how many of them are interested in it. > From al at logical-approach.com Thu Feb 15 09:46:48 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 11:46:48 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D4959E.3090502@Sun.Com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> <45D4959E.3090502@Sun.Com> Message-ID: On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, John Plocher wrote: > Could someone on the CAB/OGB please collect these nomination writeups and > post them on a "Candidate BIOs for the upcoming OGB Elections" Page under > the CAB/Governance community? > > It would be good to have a single place to find information relating to the > upcoming elections. This would also be a great place to put the dates for > the various happenings (nominations, elections, ...) so we all are on the > same page going forwards. Agreed. I'll take responsibility for it. We'll probably get the election details firmed up during todays OGB meeting.... Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Sun Feb 18 10:50:38 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 10:50:38 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] GSoC Message-ID: <45D89FFE.7030706@tadpole.com> As hopefully everyone knows by know, GSoC is on. I am hoping that we can get the OGB elections done quickly, because I believe setting up GSoC projects should be one of the early priorities for the new OGB. I wasn't privy to how last year's GSoC for OpenSolaris was run (last year I was a mentor for NetBSD). Did the project provide project suggestions for students, or were the proposals purely student suggested? It might be nice to have some ideas for students to look at. -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Mon Feb 19 19:18:15 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:18:15 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] OGB Nomination :: Glynn Foster Message-ID: <45DA6877.9050308@sun.com> Hey, Although it's probably widely know that I'm keen to run for the OGB this year, I figured I'd actually follow up with an official post. Glynn == Name: Glynn Foster Affiliation: Sun Microsystems (6+ years) Email: glynn.foster at sun.com Background: I'm not entirely sure how I managed to end up in Sun Microsystems. I suspect a large proportion of it was nepotism (having had 2 brothers working there at the time), but also the fact that it seemed like a cool company to work for. I constantly listened to dinner time discussions, much to my parents disgust, about what Sun was up to, and the fun times my brothers were having. I qualified with a 1st Class Honors in Mathematics, from Trinity College, Dublin. Go figure. I was originally intended to be an OpenOffice release manager, but fortunately my intended boss was away on vacation for 3 weeks, and I got absorbed into the desktop team under Leo Binchy, my current wonderful boss. The rest is history. I maintain Planet OpenSolaris, write the OpenSolaris Weekly Summaries and bug b*tch for whoever needs it. Motivations: Quite frankly, I believe I'm up to the job, willing to get my hands dirty, and looking forward to continuing my involvement in the OpenSolaris project. I was disgusted to have missed out on the year or more before the initial release, but determined that my experience within the GNOME community can benefit the project as a whole. I'm also looking forward to getting the opportunity to get to know a whole host of people involved in the project in person - while the technology is absolutely fabulous, it's the people that keep things interesting for me and I'd like to help keeping that a fun place to be. I'm currently a GNOME Foundation Board director and secretary. If nothing else, I believe I can write good minutes. I've previously been on the GNOME Release Team, Foundation Membership and Elections Committee, and 3 years board experience. I've also had the misfortune of organizing the annual GNOME conference in Dublin in 2003. My focus in GNOME, and the work that I'm unofficially paid for, is to be a bridge between the GNOME community and Sun so that both sides know what each other is doing. Preferably this bridge wouldn't be necessary, and I'll be working to make sure it doesn't exist for OpenSolaris. Gaps: I have never built my own kernel. I'm not a kernel, or hardware guy and I'm out of my depth for a large proportion of the discussions on the various OpenSolaris lists. Goals: I don't think anyone outside the OGB itself (and perhaps Stephen, Keith and Ben) have a really good idea of how the OGB currently operates, including myself. However, with that being said, some of the goals I'd like to see are - Make the OGB operations more transparent than ever in terms of regular published agenda and meeting minutes - Create a membership working group to handle new and existing membership applications - Create a licensing working group to discuss, and evaluate GPLv3 if and when it appears - Ensure the project has the working public infrastructure it needs to be successful in the future - Ensure that the OGB remains a *non-technical* board, being able to delegate to more appropriately experienced technical working groups If elected, I'm sure there will be other ideas that I have. Summary: Glynn Foster, 28, is currently living in Christchurch, New Zealand. From there, he's fortunate enough to be able to work on GNOME and OpenSolaris for a living, being employed by Sun Microsystems for the last 6+ years. Glynn is current Planet OpenSolaris maintainer, and writes the weekly summaries while muttering under his breath. He has yet to build a kernel, but doesn't think that is a pre-requisite for being on the OGB. From dclarke at blastwave.org Tue Feb 20 07:22:35 2007 From: dclarke at blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:22:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board Message-ID: <32856.72.39.216.186.1171984955.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org> I am happy to nominate Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board. I am a core contributor to the PowerPC Community and I am the project Director and sysadmim for Blastwave.org. I fervently believe that Jim Grisanzio has the talent and time necessary to be a successful representative of the OpenSolaris Community. I, Dennis Clarke, have been involved with the OpenSolaris project since its inception and Jim Grisanzio was there before me. He has been a voice of calm, of reason and of passion from the beginning. Jim Grisanzio would not only be a fresh perspective but he would bring the unique gift of insights into the asian markets. I respect him greatly. I would very much like to see Jim Grisanzio consider such a role. Dennis Clarke dclarke at blastwave.org Director Blastwave.org 905 - 373 - 9441 Cobourg, Ontario, Canada http://www.blastwave.org ---------------------------------------------------- Further Info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blastwave From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Tue Feb 20 08:28:05 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 08:28:05 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board In-Reply-To: <32856.72.39.216.186.1171984955.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org> References: <32856.72.39.216.186.1171984955.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org> Message-ID: <45DB2195.6010808@tadpole.com> Dennis Clarke wrote: > I am happy to nominate Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board. > > I am a core contributor to the PowerPC Community and I am the > project Director and sysadmim for Blastwave.org. I fervently > believe that Jim Grisanzio has the talent and time necessary > to be a successful representative of the OpenSolaris Community. > > I, Dennis Clarke, have been involved with the OpenSolaris project > since its inception and Jim Grisanzio was there before me. He has > been a voice of calm, of reason and of passion from the beginning. > Jim Grisanzio would not only be a fresh perspective but he would > bring the unique gift of insights into the asian markets. > > I respect him greatly. > > I would very much like to see Jim Grisanzio consider such a role. > > Dennis Clarke dclarke at blastwave.org > Director Blastwave.org 905 - 373 - 9441 > Cobourg, Ontario, Canada http://www.blastwave.org > ---------------------------------------------------- > Further Info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blastwave > > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org > +1 -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From sch at eng.sun.com Tue Feb 20 10:11:08 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:11:08 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft minutes, 14 February 2007 Message-ID: <20070220181108.GA25715@eng.sun.com> Comments, corrections welcomed. - Stephen ---- OpenSolaris GOVERNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES, 2007/02/14 Attending: DIK, FIELDING, HOPPER, PHIPPS, TEER. Absent: (None) Guests: Stephen Hahn 1. Briefly discussed of the nomination and candidacy process for the upcoming Board elections. A three step process was proposed: nomination, acceptance, seconding. Furthermore, the second must be a Core Contributor distinct from the nominee. (Self-nomination is fine.) MOTION 1: to have a three step process for candidacy, with no self-seconding proposed by TEER, seconded by PHIPPS. Motion carried unanimously. 2. HOPPER is developing a list of questions with which to (a) test the balloting system and (b) to gather information about priorities held by the Community. The draft list will be circulated to the Board. 3. Site changes to advertise election are necessary. HOPPER will work on aspects of the Board's community pages; Hahn will coordinate temporary changes to front page to highlight election timeline and procedure. A general expression of interest in Contributor and Core Contributor visit statistics to the opensolaris.org site was made; Hahn will follow up with web operations. 4. Reviewed pending Core Contributor petitions. The Board will continue to receive petitions on cab-discuss. PHIPPS commented on language barriers impacting the petitions of potential Core Contributors from various countries; FIELDING noted that cultural barriers can also prevent a petitioning process from being successful. PHIPPS suggested that the Board be ready to make nominations where such factors might prevent an optimal outcome from being reached. MOTION 2: to recognize J?rgen Keil as an At-Large Core Contributor proposed by HOPPER, seconded by TEER. Motion carried unanimously. 5. A final timeline will be sent to the announcement and other aliases, once vetted on cab-discuss. A two-week election period was preferred, to cover possibly vacationing Core Contributors. Reminders of open polls will be sent during the second week. FIELDING noted that electronic elections have resolved themselves rapidly (a few days at most) in Apache's history. 6. A subscription-moderated, archived contributors mailing list shall be set up to handle future Community-wide discussions. If possible, a read-only subscription option for non-Contributors shall be provided. 7. PHIPPS will present for consideration a revised version of OGB Position Paper 20070207 at an upcoming meeting, with corrections and amendments. MOTION 3: to appoint Stephen Hahn as Secretary proposed by FIELDING, seconded by PHIPPS. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Adjourned. -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From al at logical-approach.com Tue Feb 20 10:37:03 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 12:37:03 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) Message-ID: Wise people [1] decided that it would make a lot of sense to run a test of the new OpenSolaris voting facilities before using it for the first time to elect a new OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB). We [2] could just present a list of "silly" questions and ask the community members interested in testing the system to vote and then present the resulting sillyness. But then .. what if we devised a somewhat useful list of questions and presented them to the community as a test of the new voting software? Hmm.. perhaps, instead of a list of silly questions, why not formulate a list that looks like a poll and present it for "voting". Perhaps this would interest a larger pool of "testers" and allow them to evaluate the results produced by the SVT based, voting system. OK - with that decided and Stephen Hahn volunteering to run it, the next challenge is to formulate a reasonable poll and present it to the community. Since the main goal of this exercise is to test the voting system, and since we are on a short timeline to elect the new OGB, it was felt that a poll could be formulated quickly [3] - with the disadvantage of not providing much time for community review. In a *real* community-wide poll - more time would be required to formulate the poll and, doubtless, the poll and the resulting data would be more usefull to everyone. But again .... this is just a test! The community is encouraged to provide feedback on the poll content before its presented - but the final content will be decided (quickly) by the OGB and run in order to allow the election process to proceed expediciously. Instructions to test voters: Please examine the following list of test poll questions and vote on them in *priority* order. Remember that the voting software implements the Single Transferable Vote [4] using the Meek algorithm [5] and that you don't have to vote on every item presented. The priority order of your selection is very important. Please review the STV system before voting if you are unfamiliar with it. ------------ OpenSolaris Test Vote/Poll: Question: Which of the following items, presented in a randomized order, should be prioritized by the OGB in order to promote OpenSolaris and increase its developer mindshare: - provide a highly usable Defect Management System which allows a OpenSolaris contributor to perform queries, enter or update records, and "own" bugs - prioritize the rollout of the Mercurial Source Control Management system - provide new guidelines for the formation of Communities and Projects - examine the OpenSolaris CDDL and ascertain if it still meets the needs of the OpenSolaris community - re-assess the current Community/Project organization - provide a (fast) SPARC based kernel/project community build facility - provide a (fast) x86/AMD64 based kernel/project community build facility - elect a new OGB before the end of March 2007 - develop a process to remove inactive Communities or Projects - launch a membership drive - evaluate if mailman/jive should be upgraded or replaced - open source the OpenSolaris website application - increase community participation in the day-to-day running of the OpenSolaris infrastructure - provide support on OpenSolaris.Org for submitting, managing and tracking RTIs (Request To Integrate) - provide an OpenSolaris code review facility (to replace cr.grommit.com) - provide an OpenSolaris wiki - provide a community test facility (SPARC and x86/AMD64) - expend more resources to minimize/eliminate spam - fix the reliability issues with (disappearing) web pages - support OpenGrok indexing of projects with per-project indexing and searching - improve tools used to author/edit OpenSolaris.Org web pages - establish a mechanism to provide regular idea interchange and consultation between the OGB and Sun executive management --------------- [1] See cab-discuss list for details [2] as in the OGB in conjunction with Stephen Hahn - the owner of this new voting system. [3] NB: the initial set of poll test questions were developed with the kind participation of small group of individuals [4] STV see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Transferable_Vote [5] Meek algorithm see http://sourceforge.net/projects/votesystem/ Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM Tue Feb 20 21:29:05 2007 From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:29:05 +0900 Subject: [cab-discuss] GSoC In-Reply-To: <45D89FFE.7030706@tadpole.com> References: <45D89FFE.7030706@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45DBD8A1.9060301@Sun.COM> Garrett D'Amore wrote On 02/19/07 03:50,: > As hopefully everyone knows by know, GSoC is on. I am hoping that we > can get the OGB elections done quickly, because I believe setting up > GSoC projects should be one of the early priorities for the new OGB. > > I wasn't privy to how last year's GSoC for OpenSolaris was run (last > year I was a mentor for NetBSD). Did the project provide project > suggestions for students, or were the proposals purely student suggested? > > It might be nice to have some ideas for students to look at. > Hi ... Last year there were three threads on this that I know of: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=7878&tstart=0 http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=7866&tstart=0 http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=7962&tstart=0 Things were rushed last year, but we decided to pool our ideas as one community and apply for x projects, rather than having the individual communities within OpenSolaris apply separately. After the conversations, we applied for 10 projects, and we were awarded two: http://code.google.com/soc/opsol/about.html Idea wiki: http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/Summer_of_Code From what the mentors and students said afterwards, the two projects seemed to be successful, as well. I think if the OpenSolaris community were to participate in this program again this year, someone would have to start a conversation about it on opensolaris-discuss, some ideas would have to be flushed out, a strategy of engagement agreed upon, etc. I'm not sure the OGB could be a "mentoring organization" under the SoC rules (as I remember them from last year), but I suppose the Board could appoint someone or request someone from Sun to serve in that role. In other words, I think the mentoring organization has to be a legal organization, but I haven't read this year's rules. Jim From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM Tue Feb 20 21:45:47 2007 From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:45:47 +0900 Subject: [cab-discuss] Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board In-Reply-To: <32856.72.39.216.186.1171984955.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org> References: <32856.72.39.216.186.1171984955.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org> Message-ID: <45DBDC8B.7010200@Sun.COM> Wow. Thank you, Dennis. This is very kind of you. :) I've been thinking about this, and yes, I would like to run. I'll give it my best shot, and I think I have some ideas that would be interesting for me to focus on if elected. Since the next board will have seven members, I think there is enough room for more diversity to reflect the changes we expect to see as the community grows globally. I'll do a little homework and post some specific thoughts as we go through the process. Thanks again ... Jim Dennis Clarke wrote On 02/21/07 00:22,: > I am happy to nominate Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board. > > I am a core contributor to the PowerPC Community and I am the > project Director and sysadmim for Blastwave.org. I fervently > believe that Jim Grisanzio has the talent and time necessary > to be a successful representative of the OpenSolaris Community. > > I, Dennis Clarke, have been involved with the OpenSolaris project > since its inception and Jim Grisanzio was there before me. He has > been a voice of calm, of reason and of passion from the beginning. > Jim Grisanzio would not only be a fresh perspective but he would > bring the unique gift of insights into the asian markets. > > I respect him greatly. > > I would very much like to see Jim Grisanzio consider such a role. > > Dennis Clarke dclarke at blastwave.org > Director Blastwave.org 905 - 373 - 9441 > Cobourg, Ontario, Canada http://www.blastwave.org > ---------------------------------------------------- > Further Info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blastwave From dclarke at blastwave.org Tue Feb 20 22:15:39 2007 From: dclarke at blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 01:15:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board In-Reply-To: <45DBDC8B.7010200@Sun.COM> References: <32856.72.39.216.186.1171984955.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org> <45DBDC8B.7010200@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <34255.72.39.216.186.1172038539.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org> > Wow. Thank you, Dennis. This is very kind of you. :) hardly .. I may have made more work for you. > I've been thinking about this, and yes, I would like to run. I'll give > it my best shot, and I think I have some ideas that would be interesting > for me to focus on if elected. Since the next board will have seven > members, I think there is enough room for more diversity to reflect the > changes we expect to see as the community grows globally. I was thinking of running also. However I am too much of a boat rocker and I am not at all a corporate politics player. I ruffle feathers and I get things done. Not a very good combination in an office that deals with lots of people. > I'll do a little homework and post some specific thoughts as we go > through the process. > > Thanks again ... We all stand to benefit and so therefore, thanks to you Jim! Dennis From binarycrusader at gmail.com Tue Feb 20 23:21:58 2007 From: binarycrusader at gmail.com (Shawn Walker) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:21:58 PST Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board In-Reply-To: <45DBDC8B.7010200@Sun.COM> Message-ID: <868815.1172042548926.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> > Wow. Thank you, Dennis. This is very kind of you. :) > > I've been thinking about this, and yes, I would like > to run. I'll give > it my best shot, and I think I have some ideas that > would be interesting > for me to focus on if elected. Since the next board > will have seven > members, I think there is enough room for more > diversity to reflect the > changes we expect to see as the community grows > globally. > > I'll do a little homework and post some specific > thoughts as we go > through the process. > > Thanks again ... > > Jim +1, I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your posts and blog since this project started. Though I don't always agree with you, I believe you represent one of the best parts of it. -Shawn This message posted from opensolaris.org From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Wed Feb 21 00:08:21 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:08:21 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: Jim Grisanzio for Governing Board In-Reply-To: <868815.1172042548926.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> References: <868815.1172042548926.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <45DBFDF5.3090107@sun.com> Shawn Walker wrote: > +1, I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your posts and blog since this project > started. Though I don't always agree with you, I believe you represent one of > the best parts of it. Agree. I was also keen on Jim to run, but keen for Jim to nominate himself also. Either way, he's an excellent candidate. As someone who's relatively recently moved from the halls of MPK to the other side of the world, I believe Jim's knowledge of the issues of a distributed work environment while forming a community will prove valuable. So far we have 3 excellent candidates; Steve, Garrett, and Jim. Add me to the mix, and we're still only up to 4. There's 7 places to fill, and I'd be loving it if we had an election where there was a *really* tough choice from hopefuly 10+ awesome people. Glynn From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Wed Feb 21 10:11:17 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:11:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > ... > ... > 4) I'd also like to nominate the following persons for OGB leadership, > but I have no idea if they are interested in the said positions > (hopefully I spelled all the names right -- apologies if I have not). I > also don't know if there is any limit on how many nominations I can > make, so here's my full list, in no particular order: > > * Alan Coopersmith > * Jurgen Keil > * Joerg Schily > * Rich Lowe > * Alan DuBoff > * Casper Dik > * Bill Sommerfeld > > An enthusiastic +1 to all the above nominations (am I allowed to that?). And although they've already been seconded, +1 to Glynn, Steve, Garrett, and Jim too. In addition, several other OpenSolaris community members come to mind, who, to my knowledge, have been very involved, productive, and helpful. Therefore, I'd like to nominate the following: Ben Rockwood Cyril Plisko Eric Enright Ian Collins James Carlson Jens Elkner Jeremy Teo John Plocher Keith Wesolowski Mike Gerdts Rainer Heilke Richard L. Hamilton Roland Mainz Stephen Hahn A couple notes: - As with Garrett's nominations, I have not checked to see if these people are interested. - This post is also an opportunity for me to self-nominate, but I've decided I'm not interested in running. Eric From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Wed Feb 21 11:09:27 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 13:09:27 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: Previously, I wrote: > ... > In addition, several other OpenSolaris community members come to mind, who, > to my knowledge, have been very involved, productive, and helpful. > Therefore, I'd like to nominate the following: > > Ben Rockwood > Cyril Plisko > Eric Enright > Ian Collins > James Carlson > Jens Elkner > Jeremy Teo > John Plocher > Keith Wesolowski > Mike Gerdts > Rainer Heilke > Richard L. Hamilton > Roland Mainz > Stephen Hahn I'd also like to nominate Shawn Walker. From al at logical-approach.com Wed Feb 21 12:55:52 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:55:52 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) Message-ID: Stephen, Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead and run it. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Wed Feb 21 12:57:53 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:57:53 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45DCB251.302@tadpole.com> Al Hopper wrote: > Stephen, > > Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead > and run it. > > Regards, > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org > I think the poll looks good. The original message seemed unclear (to me) whether we were expected to reply with a vote, or if it was just to comment on the poll contents. Hopefully the test will include a test of the Apache voting software as well, right? :-) -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Wed Feb 21 13:04:18 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:04:18 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45DCB3D2.8060006@sun.com> Al Hopper wrote: > Stephen, > > Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead > and run it. Ok, this may be naive, but can the voting system handle long winded questions, rather than the terse CandidateA, CandidateB, CandidateC style ballots? Glynn From roland.mainz at nrubsig.org Wed Feb 21 13:08:07 2007 From: roland.mainz at nrubsig.org (Roland Mainz) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:08:07 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process(presented as a poll) References: Message-ID: <45DCB4B7.83DF5AF8@nrubsig.org> Al Hopper wrote: [snip] > - establish a mechanism to provide regular idea interchange and > consultation between the OGB and Sun executive management - Provide a project-specific bugzilla (for example via moving bugs.grommit.com to something like project-bugs.opensolaris.org) - Get the JIve messaging system either replaced or fixed to handle emails correctly - Enhance the webpage engine at opensolaris.org to use a Subversion repository as backend storage with diret access for project leads - Enhance the webpage engine at opensolaris.org to support DocBook/XML (maybe even as replacement for the xx@@@!!!-"TML" stuff (which is IMO very frustrating)) ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) From ian at ianshome.com Wed Feb 21 13:28:30 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:28:30 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45DCB97E.1010700@ianshome.com> Al Hopper wrote: >Stephen, > >Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead >and run it. > > > Where or how were we supposed to vote? Ian. From sommerfeld at sun.com Wed Feb 21 13:49:38 2007 From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:49:38 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <1172094578.2076.3.camel@thunk> On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 12:11 -0600, Eric Boutilier wrote: > On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Garrett D'Amore wrote: ... > > * Bill Sommerfeld > An enthusiastic +1 to all the above nominations (am I allowed to that?). I respectfully decline the nomination. - Bill From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 21 14:05:40 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:05:40 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070221220540.GA3852@eng.sun.com> * Al Hopper [2007-02-21 12:56]: > Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead > and run it. Okay. I will get it up today, or early tomorrow, code reviews allowing. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 21 14:06:43 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:06:43 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <45DCB251.302@tadpole.com> References: <45DCB251.302@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <20070221220643.GB3852@eng.sun.com> * Garrett D'Amore [2007-02-21 12:58]: > Al Hopper wrote: > > Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead > > and run it. > > I think the poll looks good. The original message seemed unclear (to > me) whether we were expected to reply with a vote, or if it was just to > comment on the poll contents. Hopefully the test will include a test of > the Apache voting software as well, right? :-) Yes, the test will use the infrastructure intended for use with the OGB elections. I'm just working through the (my) bugs now. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 21 14:07:33 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:07:33 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <45DCB3D2.8060006@sun.com> References: <45DCB3D2.8060006@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070221220733.GC3852@eng.sun.com> * Glynn Foster [2007-02-21 13:04]: > > > Al Hopper wrote: > > Stephen, > > > > Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead > > and run it. > > Ok, this may be naive, but can the voting system handle long winded questions, > rather than the terse CandidateA, CandidateB, CandidateC style ballots? It can. It even has long and short forms for answers to questions. (Yes, I ended up redoing the software... I confess to many weaknesses.) - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 21 14:13:06 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:13:06 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <45DCB97E.1010700@ianshome.com> References: <45DCB97E.1010700@ianshome.com> Message-ID: <20070221221305.GD3852@eng.sun.com> * Ian Collins [2007-02-21 13:29]: > Al Hopper wrote: > >Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead > >and run it. > > Where or how were we supposed to vote? I will send out instructions (or a pointer) along with an announcement of Al's poll. In the meanwhile, make sure you have a public SSH key registered on opensolaris.org--the system will be SSH-based. (Instructions for registering a key are embedded in http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/hg_help/ I'll pull them out for the voting pages as well.) - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From alan.coopersmith at sun.com Wed Feb 21 14:22:10 2007 From: alan.coopersmith at sun.com (Alan Coopersmith) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:22:10 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <20070221221305.GD3852@eng.sun.com> References: <45DCB97E.1010700@ianshome.com> <20070221221305.GD3852@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <45DCC612.5000708@sun.com> Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Ian Collins [2007-02-21 13:29]: >> Al Hopper wrote: >>> Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead >>> and run it. >> Where or how were we supposed to vote? > > I will send out instructions (or a pointer) along with an announcement > of Al's poll. In the meanwhile, make sure you have a public SSH key > registered on opensolaris.org--the system will be SSH-based. > > (Instructions for registering a key are embedded in > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/hg_help/ > > I'll pull them out for the voting pages as well.) For those who don't have the helpful people on #opensolaris helping them as I just did, is there any way the form for updating ssh keys could be fixed so it doesn't reject with an obtuse "Doesn't match regex" error if your copy and paste makes the horrible mistake of including a newline at the end of the key? -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering February 2007 Selection: LSARC Chair of the Month Club From al at logical-approach.com Wed Feb 21 14:35:22 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:35:22 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election schedule Message-ID: Stephen, Since you were designated the official record-keeper for the OGB - I want to verify the election calendar and publish the official OGB election schedule on the OGB pages (working on them right now). My (sloppy) notes indicate: NB: All times are UTC aka GMT Election process event Effective Timestamp -------------------------- ------------------- Nominations Open (begin date??) now Nominations Close Mon Feb 26th (midnight UTC) Campaigning open Tue Feb 27th (00:00 hours UTC) Voter registration additions closed Thur Mar 8th (midnight UTC) Campaigning close Sun Mar 11th (midnight UTC) Election open Mon Mar 12th (00:00 hours UTC) Election close Thur Mar 22nd (midnight UTC) Election results posted Fri Mar 23rd (sometime) Please correct me if necessary.... Thanks, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 21 14:39:40 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:39:40 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <45DCC612.5000708@sun.com> References: <45DCB97E.1010700@ianshome.com> <20070221221305.GD3852@eng.sun.com> <45DCC612.5000708@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070221223940.GA4013@eng.sun.com> * Alan Coopersmith [2007-02-21 14:22]: > Stephen Hahn wrote: > >* Ian Collins [2007-02-21 13:29]: > >>Al Hopper wrote: > >>>Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not go ahead > >>>and run it. > >>Where or how were we supposed to vote? > > > > I will send out instructions (or a pointer) along with an announcement > > of Al's poll. In the meanwhile, make sure you have a public SSH key > > registered on opensolaris.org--the system will be SSH-based. > > > > (Instructions for registering a key are embedded in > > > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/hg_help/ > > > > I'll pull them out for the voting pages as well.) > > For those who don't have the helpful people on #opensolaris helping them > as I just did, is there any way the form for updating ssh keys could be > fixed so it doesn't reject with an obtuse "Doesn't match regex" error if > your copy and paste makes the horrible mistake of including a newline at > the end of the key? Yes, although we'll need to check with Gary Pennington about their planned updates over the next couple of weeks. (The form also shouldn't ask about the key type, but just check that the key matches one of the valid patterns.) - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sch at eng.sun.com Wed Feb 21 14:45:39 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:45:39 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] election schedule In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070221224539.GB4013@eng.sun.com> * Al Hopper [2007-02-21 14:35]: > > Stephen, > > Since you were designated the official record-keeper for the OGB - I want > to verify the election calendar and publish the official OGB election > schedule on the OGB pages (working on them right now). My (sloppy) notes > indicate: > > NB: All times are UTC aka GMT I will add code to make the UTC times more clear; the software all is in terms of server time (California) at present. > Election process event Effective Timestamp > -------------------------- ------------------- > Nominations Open (begin date??) now > Nominations Close Mon Feb 26th (midnight UTC) My obsessive tendencies were leading to make Thursdays the "open" day and Wednesdays the "close" day for any phase, but I'm not wedded to that. > Campaigning open Tue Feb 27th (00:00 hours UTC) > Voter registration additions closed Thur Mar 8th (midnight UTC) > Campaigning close Sun Mar 11th (midnight UTC) > > Election open Mon Mar 12th (00:00 hours UTC) > Election close Thur Mar 22nd (midnight UTC) (This voting period is only 10 days.) > Election results posted Fri Mar 23rd (sometime) To meet the two week period I would close Monday, March 26th, with results on the 27th. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Wed Feb 21 14:48:13 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 11:48:13 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] election schedule In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45DCCC2D.5060104@sun.com> Hey, Al Hopper wrote: > Stephen, > > Since you were designated the official record-keeper for the OGB - I want > to verify the election calendar and publish the official OGB election > schedule on the OGB pages (working on them right now). My (sloppy) notes > indicate: > > NB: All times are UTC aka GMT We've had this problem within GNOME previously, and basically decided that midnight PST (ie. west coast US) was more appropriate. It gives the opportunity for each person to know that if they vote before midnight on the day the election closes within their respective timezone, they are safe. Causes a lot less confusion. Glynn From fielding at gbiv.com Wed Feb 21 14:48:56 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:48:56 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think the questions need to be shortened to 50 characters or so, depending on how the ballot is constructed. Also, they need to be phrased to match the lead-in of "prioritize the following" by starting with a verb. And they should not contain subjective comments on solutions. > OpenSolaris Test Vote/Poll: Question: Which of the following items, > presented in a randomized order, should be prioritized by the OGB > in order > to promote OpenSolaris and increase its developer mindshare: > > - provide a highly usable Defect Management System which allows a > OpenSolaris contributor to perform queries, enter or update > records, and > "own" bugs a. deploy a public defect management system > - prioritize the rollout of the Mercurial Source Control Management > system b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects > - provide new guidelines for the formation of Communities and Projects c. enforce guidelines for Community and Project formation > - examine the OpenSolaris CDDL and ascertain if it still meets the > needs > of the OpenSolaris community d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 e. reinvestigate the choice of licenses for OpenSolaris products > - re-assess the current Community/Project organization > - develop a process to remove inactive Communities or Projects f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization g. remove inactive Communities or Projects > - provide a (fast) SPARC based kernel/project community build facility > - provide a (fast) x86/AMD64 based kernel/project community build > facility h. provide a test build facility for SPARC architecture i. provide a test build facility for x86 architecture > - elect a new OGB before the end of March 2007 That question is irrelevant. > - launch a membership drive I have no idea what that means. > - evaluate if mailman/jive should be upgraded or replaced j. replace or remove jive interface k. replace or remove mailman interface > - open source the OpenSolaris website application Also irrelevant -- that is a decision already made by Sun. > - increase community participation in the day-to-day running of the > OpenSolaris infrastructure l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org > - provide support on OpenSolaris.Org for submitting, managing and > tracking > RTIs (Request To Integrate) m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system > - provide an OpenSolaris code review facility (to replace > cr.grommit.com) n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org > - provide an OpenSolaris wiki o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org > - provide a community test facility (SPARC and x86/AMD64) duplicate > - expend more resources to minimize/eliminate spam we don't control those resources > - fix the reliability issues with (disappearing) web pages duplicate of other questions regarding jive software > - support OpenGrok indexing of projects with per-project indexing and > searching p. deploy OpenGrok indexing of projects > - improve tools used to author/edit OpenSolaris.Org web pages q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki > - establish a mechanism to provide regular idea interchange and > consultation between the OGB and Sun executive management r. establish regular communication with Sun executive management The list is still way too long -- any more than 12 questions is just testing the endurance of the reader, not their priorities. I suggest we reduce it to: a. deploy a public defect management system b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization h. provide a test build facility j. replace or remove jive interface k. replace or remove mailman interface l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki ....Roy From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM Wed Feb 21 14:55:19 2007 From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 11:55:19 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45DCCDD7.9060002@sun.com> Hi, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > I think the questions need to be shortened to 50 characters or so, > depending on how the ballot is constructed. Also, they need to > be phrased to match the lead-in of "prioritize the following" by > starting with a verb. And it might actually be fun asking the current OGB candidates for their views on some of these issues as part of the campaigning period ;) Glynn From webmink at sun.com Wed Feb 21 15:24:51 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:24:51 +0000 Subject: [cab-discuss] election schedule In-Reply-To: <45DCCC2D.5060104@sun.com> References: <45DCCC2D.5060104@sun.com> Message-ID: <3DACEE93-AA4C-486B-BFF5-5F4345163D85@sun.com> On Feb 21, 2007, at 22:48, Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > Al Hopper wrote: >> Stephen, >> >> Since you were designated the official record-keeper for the OGB - >> I want >> to verify the election calendar and publish the official OGB election >> schedule on the OGB pages (working on them right now). My >> (sloppy) notes >> indicate: >> >> NB: All times are UTC aka GMT > > We've had this problem within GNOME previously, and basically > decided that > midnight PST (ie. west coast US) was more appropriate. It gives the > opportunity > for each person to know that if they vote before midnight on the > day the > election closes within their respective timezone, they are safe. +1 > > Causes a lot less confusion. Unless you live in Hawai'i. S. From webmink at sun.com Wed Feb 21 15:28:14 2007 From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 23:28:14 +0000 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <20070221223940.GA4013@eng.sun.com> References: <45DCB97E.1010700@ianshome.com> <20070221221305.GD3852@eng.sun.com> <45DCC612.5000708@sun.com> <20070221223940.GA4013@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <02A586DB-D567-4040-92F9-D3B8C075908B@sun.com> On Feb 21, 2007, at 22:39, Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Alan Coopersmith [2007-02-21 14:22]: >> Stephen Hahn wrote: >>> * Ian Collins [2007-02-21 13:29]: >>>> Al Hopper wrote: >>>>> Since we've received little feedback on the test/poll - why not >>>>> go ahead >>>>> and run it. >>>> Where or how were we supposed to vote? >>> >>> I will send out instructions (or a pointer) along with an >>> announcement >>> of Al's poll. In the meanwhile, make sure you have a public SSH >>> key >>> registered on opensolaris.org--the system will be SSH-based. >>> >>> (Instructions for registering a key are embedded in >>> >>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/hg_help/ >>> >>> I'll pull them out for the voting pages as well.) >> >> For those who don't have the helpful people on #opensolaris >> helping them >> as I just did, is there any way the form for updating ssh keys >> could be >> fixed so it doesn't reject with an obtuse "Doesn't match regex" >> error if >> your copy and paste makes the horrible mistake of including a >> newline at >> the end of the key? > > Yes, although we'll need to check with Gary Pennington about their > planned updates over the next couple of weeks. (The form also > shouldn't ask about the key type, but just check that the key > matches > one of the valid patterns.) It would be better if it was just possible to upload the key file. I found it non-obvious how to get a key registered. The whole process is already pretty involved, so reducing the key registration to a file upload dialog (along with a default upload path of ~/.ssh/) would make it a whole lot easier. S. From al at logical-approach.com Wed Feb 21 16:43:42 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:43:42 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election schedule In-Reply-To: <20070221224539.GB4013@eng.sun.com> References: <20070221224539.GB4013@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Al Hopper [2007-02-21 14:35]: > > > > Stephen, > > > > Since you were designated the official record-keeper for the OGB - I want > > to verify the election calendar and publish the official OGB election > > schedule on the OGB pages (working on them right now). My (sloppy) notes > > indicate: > > > > NB: All times are UTC aka GMT OK - we'll (per the suggestions and +1 votes) make all the times PST and minimize any last minute changes in the voting software. > I will add code to make the UTC times more clear; the software all is > in terms of server time (California) at present. > > > Election process event Effective Timestamp > > -------------------------- ------------------- > > Nominations Open (begin date??) now > > Nominations Close Mon Feb 26th (midnight UTC) > > My obsessive tendencies were leading to make Thursdays the "open" day > and Wednesdays the "close" day for any phase, but I'm not wedded to > that. > > > Campaigning open Tue Feb 27th (00:00 hours UTC) > > Voter registration additions closed Thur Mar 8th (midnight UTC) > > Campaigning close Sun Mar 11th (midnight UTC) > > > > Election open Mon Mar 12th (00:00 hours UTC) > > Election close Thur Mar 22nd (midnight UTC) > > (This voting period is only 10 days.) Whoops. > > Election results posted Fri Mar 23rd (sometime) > > To meet the two week period I would close Monday, March 26th, with > results on the 27th. Yep - now I remember that we decided on 14 days (2 weeks) for voting - to allow more time for folks on vacation (whatever that is!). Thanks Stephen, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From al at logical-approach.com Wed Feb 21 18:00:26 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:00:26 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > I think the questions need to be shortened to 50 characters or so, > depending on how the ballot is constructed. Also, they need to > be phrased to match the lead-in of "prioritize the following" by > starting with a verb. > > And they should not contain subjective comments on solutions. > > > OpenSolaris Test Vote/Poll: Question: Which of the following items, > > presented in a randomized order, should be prioritized by the OGB > > in order > > to promote OpenSolaris and increase its developer mindshare: > > > > - provide a highly usable Defect Management System which allows a > > OpenSolaris contributor to perform queries, enter or update > > records, and > > "own" bugs > > a. deploy a public defect management system > > > - prioritize the rollout of the Mercurial Source Control Management > > system > > b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects We can't do that - many projects are tied to other SCMs; in many cases, to remain compatible with upstream sources. Mercurial has been designated the preferred SCM for ON and the preferred SCM for new projects. So the question is whether prioritizing the rollout of Mercurial will help increase developer mindshare. And where this item lies in the list of priorities. > > - provide new guidelines for the formation of Communities and Projects > > c. enforce guidelines for Community and Project formation > > > - examine the OpenSolaris CDDL and ascertain if it still meets the > > needs > > of the OpenSolaris community > > d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 > e. reinvestigate the choice of licenses for OpenSolaris products > > > - re-assess the current Community/Project organization > > - develop a process to remove inactive Communities or Projects > > f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization > g. remove inactive Communities or Projects > > > - provide a (fast) SPARC based kernel/project community build facility > > - provide a (fast) x86/AMD64 based kernel/project community build > > facility > > h. provide a test build facility for SPARC architecture > i. provide a test build facility for x86 architecture > > > - elect a new OGB before the end of March 2007 > > That question is irrelevant. Agreed. > > - launch a membership drive > > I have no idea what that means. > > > - evaluate if mailman/jive should be upgraded or replaced > > j. replace or remove jive interface > k. replace or remove mailman interface > > > - open source the OpenSolaris website application > > Also irrelevant -- that is a decision already made by Sun. But the question allows us to learn if the community thinks that opensourcing it would help increase developer mindshare. If the community thinks that its irrelevant, then they won't vote for it. > > - increase community participation in the day-to-day running of the > > OpenSolaris infrastructure > > l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org > > > - provide support on OpenSolaris.Org for submitting, managing and > > tracking > > RTIs (Request To Integrate) > > m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system > > > - provide an OpenSolaris code review facility (to replace > > cr.grommit.com) > > n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org > > > - provide an OpenSolaris wiki > > o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org > > > - provide a community test facility (SPARC and x86/AMD64) > > duplicate No - see more below - but fails miserably as a question because you saw it as a dupe. > > - expend more resources to minimize/eliminate spam > > we don't control those resources > > > - fix the reliability issues with (disappearing) web pages > > duplicate of other questions regarding jive software > > > - support OpenGrok indexing of projects with per-project indexing and > > searching > > p. deploy OpenGrok indexing of projects > > > - improve tools used to author/edit OpenSolaris.Org web pages > > q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki > > > - establish a mechanism to provide regular idea interchange and > > consultation between the OGB and Sun executive management > > r. establish regular communication with Sun executive management > > The list is still way too long -- any more than 12 questions is > just testing the endurance of the reader, not their priorities. > I suggest we reduce it to: > > a. deploy a public defect management system > b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects > d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 Remember the goal is to increase Opensolaris developer mindshare. As such, it makes sense to re-evaluate all licensing options - including the current CDDL license - not just to limit it to the analysis of GPLv3. So a shorter version of the original would read: d. re-evaluate current licensing and recommend changes > f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization > h. provide a test build facility There are separate needs/issues here: 1) test facility to run any/all operating system test suites and benchmark suites to ensure that a change does not break something or impact system performance (negatively). 2) build facility for SPARC 3) build facility for x86/AMD64 Since the voting system is STV - it would be interesting to see which facilities are relevant to increasing developer mindshare. For example, SPARC build systems tend to be more expensive to acquire - _fast_ SPARC build systems are (usually) beyond the resources of a single FOSS developer/contributor[1]. So, my suspicion is that a SPARC based build facility might be the most relevant option to increasing developer mindshare - but it sure would be nice to get some real-world feedback from the community. So a shorter version of the above would still be 3 items as follows: h1. provide a SPARC based kernel/project build facility h2. provide an x86/AMD64 based kernel/project build facility h3. provide an ON test facility (SPARC & x86) > j. replace or remove jive interface > k. replace or remove mailman interface > l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org > m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system > n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org > o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org > q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki > > ....Roy > Thanks Roy. I'll give this some more thought and push out another revision for comment. [1] for example, Roland Mainz' (working on the ksh93 integration project) fastest SPARC build system is an Ultra5 - which is a miserable system to do *any* development work on. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From al at logical-approach.com Wed Feb 21 18:02:22 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:02:22 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <45DCCDD7.9060002@sun.com> References: <45DCCDD7.9060002@sun.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Glynn Foster wrote: > Hi, > > Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > I think the questions need to be shortened to 50 characters or so, > > depending on how the ballot is constructed. Also, they need to > > be phrased to match the lead-in of "prioritize the following" by > > starting with a verb. > > And it might actually be fun asking the current OGB candidates for their views > on some of these issues as part of the campaigning period ;) Agreed. But anything that gets the community thinking about how we can increase developer mindshare is a Good Thing IMHO. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Wed Feb 21 18:20:46 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:20:46 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070222022046.GA10794@sun.com> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 08:00:26PM -0600, Al Hopper wrote: > Remember the goal is to increase Opensolaris developer mindshare. Is it? I thought our highest-level objective is to produce the best operating system possible. The OGB is chartered to coordinate and facilitate that effort for the benefit of those participating in it. Increasing mindshare is nice and a worthy goal insofar as it allows us to get more top-quality work done, and it is the stated purpose of the Marketing Community. But it's not the primary purpose of the OGB. This poll is indeed shaping up to be interesting, but I would expect that those who can vote, if this is to be an all-up test, are the Core Contributors. They will likely be voting based on their needs with respect to getting their work done, not (except possibly for those leading the Marketing Community) on the basis of increasing mindshare. I'd hate to think we're losing focus and shifting to a World Domination way of thinking at the expense of immediate and practical engineering necessity. I'm guessing that's not what you intended; nevertheless, I do hope people who've tuned in to participate in the OGB election don't get the wrong idea: the OGB's main job at this point is to help people work efficiently and in concert. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Wed Feb 21 21:49:08 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:49:08 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45DD2ED4.5090002@Sun.Com> > The list is still way too long -- any more than 12 questions is > just testing the endurance of the reader, not their priorities. > I suggest we reduce it to: > > a. deploy a public defect management system > b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects > d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 > f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization > h. provide a test build facility > j. replace or remove jive interface > k. replace or remove mailman interface > l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org > m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system > n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org > o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org > q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki +1 -John From richlowe at richlowe.net Thu Feb 22 06:13:38 2007 From: richlowe at richlowe.net (Richard Lowe) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:13:38 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45DDA512.9090902@richlowe.net> Roy T. Fielding wrote: > The list is still way too long -- any more than 12 questions is > just testing the endurance of the reader, not their priorities. > I suggest we reduce it to: > > a. deploy a public defect management system > b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects > d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 > f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization > h. provide a test build facility > j. replace or remove jive interface > k. replace or remove mailman interface > l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org > m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system > n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org > o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org > q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki > While I agree that shorter questions would be better, your shortening here changes some of the questions, rather than just phrasing them more briefly. At least b. j. k. l, and q. changed meaning fairly substantially, I think. To be clear, are you purely suggesting the briefer language, or the briefer language *and* the different questions? -- Rich From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Thu Feb 22 06:49:19 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:49:19 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 both to reducing the number of questions to 12 or so, and shortening the questions themselves to 50 characters or so. Eric On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > I think the questions need to be shortened to 50 characters or so, > depending on how the ballot is constructed. Also, they need to > be phrased to match the lead-in of "prioritize the following" by > starting with a verb. > > And they should not contain subjective comments on solutions. > >> OpenSolaris Test Vote/Poll: Question: Which of the following items, >> presented in a randomized order, should be prioritized by the OGB >> in order >> to promote OpenSolaris and increase its developer mindshare: >> >> - provide a highly usable Defect Management System which allows a >> OpenSolaris contributor to perform queries, enter or update >> records, and >> "own" bugs > > a. deploy a public defect management system > >> - prioritize the rollout of the Mercurial Source Control Management >> system > > b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects > >> - provide new guidelines for the formation of Communities and Projects > > c. enforce guidelines for Community and Project formation > >> - examine the OpenSolaris CDDL and ascertain if it still meets the >> needs >> of the OpenSolaris community > > d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 > e. reinvestigate the choice of licenses for OpenSolaris products > >> - re-assess the current Community/Project organization >> - develop a process to remove inactive Communities or Projects > > f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization > g. remove inactive Communities or Projects > >> - provide a (fast) SPARC based kernel/project community build facility >> - provide a (fast) x86/AMD64 based kernel/project community build >> facility > > h. provide a test build facility for SPARC architecture > i. provide a test build facility for x86 architecture > >> - elect a new OGB before the end of March 2007 > > That question is irrelevant. > >> - launch a membership drive > > I have no idea what that means. > >> - evaluate if mailman/jive should be upgraded or replaced > > j. replace or remove jive interface > k. replace or remove mailman interface > >> - open source the OpenSolaris website application > > Also irrelevant -- that is a decision already made by Sun. > >> - increase community participation in the day-to-day running of the >> OpenSolaris infrastructure > > l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org > >> - provide support on OpenSolaris.Org for submitting, managing and >> tracking >> RTIs (Request To Integrate) > > m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system > >> - provide an OpenSolaris code review facility (to replace >> cr.grommit.com) > > n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org > >> - provide an OpenSolaris wiki > > o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org > >> - provide a community test facility (SPARC and x86/AMD64) > > duplicate > >> - expend more resources to minimize/eliminate spam > > we don't control those resources > >> - fix the reliability issues with (disappearing) web pages > > duplicate of other questions regarding jive software > >> - support OpenGrok indexing of projects with per-project indexing and >> searching > > p. deploy OpenGrok indexing of projects > >> - improve tools used to author/edit OpenSolaris.Org web pages > > q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki > >> - establish a mechanism to provide regular idea interchange and >> consultation between the OGB and Sun executive management > > r. establish regular communication with Sun executive management > > The list is still way too long -- any more than 12 questions is > just testing the endurance of the reader, not their priorities. > I suggest we reduce it to: > > a. deploy a public defect management system > b. deploy Mercurial source control across all projects > d. analyze and comment on the next draft of GPLv3 > f. reorganize the existing Community/Project organization > h. provide a test build facility > j. replace or remove jive interface > k. replace or remove mailman interface > l. create an infrastructure project to run opensolaris.org > m. deploy a public Request To Integrate (RTI) system > n. deploy a public code review facility on opensolaris.org > o. deploy a public wiki on opensolaris.org > q. replace opensolaris.org tools with an open source CMS or wiki > > ....Roy > From garrett_damore at tadpole.com Thu Feb 22 09:17:28 2007 From: garrett_damore at tadpole.com (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:17:28 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process (presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <20070222022046.GA10794@sun.com> References: <20070222022046.GA10794@sun.com> Message-ID: <45DDD028.6000507@tadpole.com> Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 08:00:26PM -0600, Al Hopper wrote: > > >> Remember the goal is to increase Opensolaris developer mindshare. >> > > Is it? I thought our highest-level objective is to produce the best > operating system possible. The OGB is chartered to coordinate and > facilitate that effort for the benefit of those participating in it. > Increasing mindshare is nice and a worthy goal insofar as it allows us > to get more top-quality work done, and it is the stated purpose of the > Marketing Community. But it's not the primary purpose of the OGB. > > This poll is indeed shaping up to be interesting, but I would expect > that those who can vote, if this is to be an all-up test, are the Core > Contributors. They will likely be voting based on their needs with > respect to getting their work done, not (except possibly for those > leading the Marketing Community) on the basis of increasing mindshare. > > I'd hate to think we're losing focus and shifting to a World > Domination way of thinking at the expense of immediate and practical > engineering necessity. I'm guessing that's not what you intended; > nevertheless, I do hope people who've tuned in to participate in the > OGB election don't get the wrong idea: the OGB's main job at this > point is to help people work efficiently and in concert. > > +1. World Domination (errr..... mindshare) is a means to an end. That end is to produce the best OS out there. Increasing developer mindshare increases the number of resources thrown at the problem (without saying anything about the "quality" of those resources), and also helps minimize gaps in application support. OGB's primary goal should be to facilitate the development of the OS, but as part of that goal, I do not believe they can ignore mindshare. -- Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division, General Dynamics C4 Systems http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191 From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Thu Feb 22 12:04:47 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:04:47 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Overview (rollup) of recent activity on cab-discuss Message-ID: For background on what this is, see: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=24416#24416 http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=25200#25200 ============================= cab-discuss 02/01 - 02/15 ============================= Size of all threads during period: Thread size Topic ----------- ----- 27 Draft ballot? 25 CAB conf call 23 CAB conf call - communication 12 Nominations? 11 nomination procedure? 9 nomination 6 Fwd: CAB conf call 5 Vote list 9 Request to be Recognized as a Core Contributor 3 this weeks OGB meeting 5 request to be recognized as a core contributor 3 Section 6.4 parse error 2 project creation 2 parliamentary procedure and IRC 2 List of members, 2/7 2 List of members, 2/5 2 CAB/OGB website content needs to be updated 1 revoking an expulsion 1 The new "The Love you Take is equal to the Love you Make" Open(2) License 1 My Research: new website 1 Draft minutes, 2007/02/07 ================================================================ Posting activity by person for period: # of posts By ---------- -------------------------------------------------- 21 sch at eng.sun.com (stephen hahn) 17 al at logical-approach.com (al hopper) 10 webmink at sun.com (simon phipps) 10 glynn.foster at sun.com (glynn foster) 9 simon.phipps at sun.com (simon phipps) 9 casper.dik at sun.com (casper dik) 7 john.plocher at sun.com (john plocher) 7 ian at ianshome.com (ian collins) 7 garrett_damore at tadpole.com (garrett d'amore) 7 fielding at gbiv.com (roy t. fielding) 5 eric.boutilier at sun.com (eric boutilier) 4 roland.mainz at nrubsig.org (roland mainz) 4 mike.kupfer at sun.com (mike kupfer) 4 keith.wesolowski at sun.com (keith m wesolowski) 4 jim.grisanzio at sun.com (jim grisanzio) 3 stevel at sun.com (stephen lau) 3 richlowe at richlowe.net (richard lowe) 3 rich.teer at rite-group.com (rich teer) 2 sommerfeld at sun.com (bill sommerfeld) 2 mo137222 at jurassic.sfbay.sun.com (michelle olson) 2 johansen-osdev at sun.com (johansen-osdev) 2 bonnie.corwin at sun.com (bonnie corwin) 2 bill at rushmores.net (bill rushmore) 2 alan.burlison at sun.com (alan burlison) 1 stephen.harpster at sun.com (stephen harpster) 1 maurizio.teli at soc.unitn.it (maurizio teli) 1 justin at erenkrantz.com (justin erenkrantz) 1 garrett at damore.org (garrett d'amore) 1 frank.vanderlinden at sun.com (frank van der linden) 1 benr at cuddletech.com (ben rockwood) ================================================================ Discussion URL: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=17 Main URL: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/ From al at logical-approach.com Thu Feb 22 12:43:31 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:43:31 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] recognized as a core contributor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Juergen, Per a unanimous vote, the CAB/OGB is pleased to recognize the sustained participation and contribution of Juergen Keil and have him designated as an OpenSolaris Core Contributor at large - with all the privilidges that this title confers. Almost every ON developer is probably well aware of Juergens constant and consistently high quality technical contributions to this project. He demonstates great technical skills and provides valuable assistance to anyone with an OpenSolaris related issue. Juergen also contributes heavily to the Solaris on x86 list (solarisx86 at yahoogroups.com) where he has been active long before joining OpenSolaris in June of 2005. Those of us longtimers on that list, were amazed by his ability, before Solaris was open sourced, to isolate a bug to a section of code, disassemble that code, fix the bug and then provide a machine level "patch" to resolve the issue. Juergen has also contributed several OpenSolaris drivers and is a great asset to OpenSolaris. As someone who has personally benefited, more than once, from Juergens many contributions and also speaking on behalf of the OGB - a big Thank You and keep up the Good Work. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From roland.mainz at nrubsig.org Thu Feb 22 18:56:50 2007 From: roland.mainz at nrubsig.org (Roland Mainz) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 03:56:50 +0100 Subject: mailman removal ? / was: Re: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process(presented as a poll) References: Message-ID: <45DE57F2.8B2808F7@nrubsig.org> Al Hopper wrote: [snip] > - evaluate if mailman/jive should be upgraded or replaced Please remove "mailman" from that list. It's one of the pieces which currently works more or less flawlessly. Most of the problems we have with email, postings and SPAM are coming from the "Jive"-addon (I wish that thing would be boiled in acid or worse). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) From josh at jmctech.com.au Thu Feb 22 21:08:34 2007 From: josh at jmctech.com.au (Joshua Clulow) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:08:34 +1100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominating James McPherson for OGB Message-ID: <45DE76D2.4020707@jmctech.com.au> Greetings, I would like to nominate jmcp (James McPherson) as a candidate for the Governing Board. As a core contributor for the SOSUG (Sydney, AU) Usergroup I've met James several times and frequently converse with him via IRC. He's hard working, knowledgeable, and always happy to help -- as such he is a valuable asset to the OpenSolaris community. If James can find the spare cycles to be on the Board then I feel it would be richer for it. -- Regards, Joshua M. Clulow JMCtech - http://www.jmctech.com.au/ IT Consultant ABN: 49 933 254 106 Mobile: +61 (412) 421 925 E-mail: josh at jmctech.com.au From James.McPherson at Sun.COM Thu Feb 22 21:23:28 2007 From: James.McPherson at Sun.COM (James C. McPherson) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:23:28 +1100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nominating James McPherson for OGB In-Reply-To: <45DE76D2.4020707@jmctech.com.au> References: <45DE76D2.4020707@jmctech.com.au> Message-ID: <45DE7A50.2040708@Sun.COM> Joshua Clulow wrote: > Greetings, > > I would like to nominate jmcp (James McPherson) as a candidate for the > Governing Board. > > As a core contributor for the SOSUG (Sydney, AU) Usergroup I've met > James several times and frequently converse with him via IRC. He's hard > working, knowledgeable, and always happy to help -- as such he is a > valuable asset to the OpenSolaris community. > > If James can find the spare cycles to be on the Board then I feel it > would be richer for it. Hi Josh, thankyou for the nomination - I humbly accept. James C. McPherson -- Solaris kernel software engineer Sun Microsystems From sherry.moore at sun.com Thu Feb 22 21:57:14 2007 From: sherry.moore at sun.com (Sherry Moore) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 21:57:14 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Nominating James McPherson for OGB In-Reply-To: <45DE76D2.4020707@jmctech.com.au> References: <45DE76D2.4020707@jmctech.com.au> Message-ID: <20070223055714.GL316166@sun.com> A huge "+1" from me (would that count as "+2"? :) ). James has been extremely enthusiastic and effective in promoting Solaris in various forums. He is always among the first to try the cutting edge technology in Solaris, to provide feedback and suggestions, and to share what he knows with the other curious minds. I believe he will make an excellent board member. Thanks, Sherry Moore -- Sherry Moore, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/sherrym On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 04:08:34PM +1100, Joshua Clulow wrote: > Greetings, > > I would like to nominate jmcp (James McPherson) as a candidate for the > Governing Board. > > As a core contributor for the SOSUG (Sydney, AU) Usergroup I've met > James several times and frequently converse with him via IRC. He's hard > working, knowledgeable, and always happy to help -- as such he is a > valuable asset to the OpenSolaris community. > > If James can find the spare cycles to be on the Board then I feel it > would be richer for it. > > -- > > > Regards, > > Joshua M. Clulow > JMCtech - http://www.jmctech.com.au/ > IT Consultant > ABN: 49 933 254 106 > Mobile: +61 (412) 421 925 > E-mail: josh at jmctech.com.au > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss at opensolaris.org From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Fri Feb 23 07:30:59 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:30:59 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Nominating James McPherson for OGB In-Reply-To: <20070223055714.GL316166@sun.com> References: <45DE76D2.4020707@jmctech.com.au> <20070223055714.GL316166@sun.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Sherry Moore wrote: > A huge "+1" from me (would that count as "+2"? :) ). Huge +1 from me too. So is that +4 or 2(huge+1) ? > James has been extremely enthusiastic and effective in promoting > Solaris in various forums. He is always among the first to try the > cutting edge technology in Solaris, to provide feedback and > suggestions, and to share what he knows with the other curious minds. > I believe he will make an excellent board member. > > Thanks, > Sherry Moore > -- > Sherry Moore, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/sherrym > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 04:08:34PM +1100, Joshua Clulow wrote: >> Greetings, >> >> I would like to nominate jmcp (James McPherson) as a candidate for the >> Governing Board. >> >> As a core contributor for the SOSUG (Sydney, AU) Usergroup I've met >> James several times and frequently converse with him via IRC. He's hard >> working, knowledgeable, and always happy to help -- as such he is a >> valuable asset to the OpenSolaris community. >> >> If James can find the spare cycles to be on the Board then I feel it >> would be richer for it. >> >> -- >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Joshua M. Clulow >> JMCtech - http://www.jmctech.com.au/ >> IT Consultant >> ABN: 49 933 254 106 >> Mobile: +61 (412) 421 925 >> E-mail: josh at jmctech.com.au >> _______________________________________________ >> opensolaris-discuss mailing list >> opensolaris-discuss at opensolaris.org > From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Fri Feb 23 07:37:13 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:37:13 -0600 (CST) Subject: mailman removal ? / was: Re: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process(presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <45DE57F2.8B2808F7@nrubsig.org> References: <45DE57F2.8B2808F7@nrubsig.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Roland Mainz wrote: > Al Hopper wrote: > [snip] >> - evaluate if mailman/jive should be upgraded or replaced > > Please remove "mailman" from that list. It's one of the pieces which > currently works more or less flawlessly. +1. Further to that point: An upgrade of Mailman is in the works, so it'll get better; we're in good company since so many other opensource projects use Mailman; and it's written in a very popular, powerful, accessible language (Python). Eric > > Most of the problems we have with email, postings and SPAM are coming > from the "Jive"-addon (I wish that thing would be boiled in acid or > worse). > > ---- > > Bye, > Roland > > -- > __ . . __ > (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org > \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer > /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 > (;O/ \/ \O;) > From richlowe at richlowe.net Fri Feb 23 07:41:50 2007 From: richlowe at richlowe.net (Richard Lowe) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:41:50 -0500 Subject: mailman removal ? / was: Re: [cab-discuss] test questions to test OGB election process(presented as a poll) In-Reply-To: <45DE57F2.8B2808F7@nrubsig.org> References: <45DE57F2.8B2808F7@nrubsig.org> Message-ID: <45DF0B3E.8050903@richlowe.net> Roland Mainz wrote: > Al Hopper wrote: > [snip] >> - evaluate if mailman/jive should be upgraded or replaced > > Please remove "mailman" from that list. It's one of the pieces which > currently works more or less flawlessly. > Which goes back to my (unanswered) query about whether this was intended to shorten the questions, or actually change them, as it did. -- Rich From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Mon Feb 26 09:34:43 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:34:43 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <20070226173443.GA6735@sun.com> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 12:11:17PM -0600, Eric Boutilier wrote: > In addition, several other OpenSolaris community members come to mind, who, > to my knowledge, have been very involved, productive, and helpful. > Therefore, I'd like to nominate the following: ... > Keith Wesolowski ... Thanks, Eric. It's unclear (since I've seen no final publication of the schedule and the last one posted to this list could be read such that they closed yesterday at 0000 UTC/4pm PST) that nominations remain open, but if so I'd like to accept this nomination and announce my candidacy for OGB membership. I'll follow up with position papers later this week. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From alan.coopersmith at sun.com Mon Feb 26 09:39:34 2007 From: alan.coopersmith at sun.com (Alan Coopersmith) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:39:34 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: <20070226173443.GA6735@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> <20070226173443.GA6735@sun.com> Message-ID: <45E31B56.2020006@sun.com> Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 12:11:17PM -0600, Eric Boutilier wrote: > >> In addition, several other OpenSolaris community members come to mind, who, >> to my knowledge, have been very involved, productive, and helpful. >> Therefore, I'd like to nominate the following: > ... >> Keith Wesolowski > ... > > Thanks, Eric. It's unclear (since I've seen no final publication of > the schedule and the last one posted to this list could be read such > that they closed yesterday at 0000 UTC/4pm PST) that nominations > remain open, but if so I'd like to accept this nomination and announce > my candidacy for OGB membership. I'll follow up with position papers > later this week. > +1 -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From David.Comay at Sun.COM Mon Feb 26 13:12:18 2007 From: David.Comay at Sun.COM (David.Comay at Sun.COM) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:12:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Nomination Message-ID: I would like to nominate Michelle Olson, one of the leaders of the Documentation Community, for the OpenSolaris Governing Board. I'm a Core Contributor to the Zones Community Group and strongly believe that Michelle has the talent, energy and creativeness necessary to be a strong representative for OpenSolaris. She has shown all of those attributes as a leader of the Documentation Community. dsc From David.Comay at Sun.COM Mon Feb 26 13:26:10 2007 From: David.Comay at Sun.COM (David.Comay at Sun.COM) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:26:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: <20070226173443.GA6735@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> <20070226173443.GA6735@sun.com> Message-ID: > Thanks, Eric. It's unclear (since I've seen no final publication of > the schedule and the last one posted to this list could be read such > that they closed yesterday at 0000 UTC/4pm PST) that nominations > remain open, but if so I'd like to accept this nomination and announce > my candidacy for OGB membership. I'll follow up with position papers > later this week. +1 (for Keith's nomination) I also was unclear as to what the nomination schedule was - for some reason, I was expecting a complete schedule to be posted by now and that the original one was just a draft. And I too wasn't clear (if the schedule was in fact, official) whether nominations closed at the start of the 26th or at the end. Is there a deadline by which nominations are to be accepted and seconded? dsc From Susan.Weber at Sun.COM Mon Feb 26 13:43:19 2007 From: Susan.Weber at Sun.COM (Susan Weber) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:43:19 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nomination In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E35477.10203@sun.com> +1 David, you beat me to the punch. I've been sitting on this nomination for a week, waiting for Michelle's approval: I would like to nominate Michelle Olson for OGB. Michelle has been a leader of the OpenSolaris Documentation Community. While building and active and vital community on OpenSolaris, she has been a force in developing the processes for releasing documentation as open source for Solaris books and man pages, and getting it done. Her boundless energy has taken her outside the documentation community to other cross-team projects. Michelle authored the OpenSolaris Starter Kit, a project that was a collaboration effort between engineering, documentation, and Sun's Media and Production department. Michelle has worked with G11N to get localization projects started around documentation. Michelle is the consumate communicator, who responds to community inquiries and treats all participants with dignity and respect. Michelle has also been active in the Silicon Valley OpenSolaris Users' Group and has represented OpenSolaris at various conferences, including SIGCE, FOSDEM and OSDEVCon. Michelle has a passion for OpenSolaris, which coupled with the breadth of her experience, makes her an excellant nominee for OGB. Sue David.Comay at sun.com wrote: > I would like to nominate Michelle Olson, one of the leaders of the > Documentation Community, for the OpenSolaris Governing Board. > > I'm a Core Contributor to the Zones Community Group and strongly > believe that Michelle has the talent, energy and creativeness necessary > to be a strong representative for OpenSolaris. She has shown all of > those attributes as a leader of the Documentation Community. > > dsc > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Teresa.Giacomini at Sun.COM Mon Feb 26 13:46:54 2007 From: Teresa.Giacomini at Sun.COM (Teresa Giacomini) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:46:54 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nomination In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E3554E.1070508@sun.com> David.Comay at sun.com wrote: > I would like to nominate Michelle Olson, one of the leaders of the > Documentation Community, for the OpenSolaris Governing Board. > > I'm a Core Contributor to the Zones Community Group and strongly > believe that Michelle has the talent, energy and creativeness necessary > to be a strong representative for OpenSolaris. She has shown all of > those attributes as a leader of the Documentation Community. > > dsc > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org +1 From benr at cuddletech.com Mon Feb 26 13:48:06 2007 From: benr at cuddletech.com (Ben Rockwood) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:48:06 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Nomination In-Reply-To: <45E35477.10203@sun.com> References: <45E35477.10203@sun.com> Message-ID: <45E35596.2060001@cuddletech.com> Go Michelle!!! +1!!! benr. Susan Weber wrote: > +1 > > David, you beat me to the punch. I've been sitting on this nomination > for a week, waiting for Michelle's approval: > > I would like to nominate Michelle Olson for OGB. Michelle has been > a leader of the OpenSolaris Documentation Community. While building > and active and vital community on OpenSolaris, she has been a force > in developing the processes for releasing > documentation as open source for Solaris books and man pages, and > getting it done. > Her boundless energy has taken her outside the documentation > community to other cross-team projects. > Michelle authored the OpenSolaris Starter Kit, a project that was a > collaboration effort between engineering, > documentation, and Sun's Media and Production department. Michelle > has worked with G11N to get localization > projects started around documentation. > > Michelle is the consumate communicator, who responds to community > inquiries and treats all participants with dignity and respect. > Michelle has also been active in the Silicon Valley OpenSolaris > Users' Group and has represented OpenSolaris at various conferences, > including SIGCE, FOSDEM and OSDEVCon. > Michelle has a passion for OpenSolaris, which coupled with the > breadth of her experience, makes her an excellant nominee for OGB. > > Sue > > > > > David.Comay at sun.com wrote: >> I would like to nominate Michelle Olson, one of the leaders of the >> Documentation Community, for the OpenSolaris Governing Board. >> >> I'm a Core Contributor to the Zones Community Group and strongly >> believe that Michelle has the talent, energy and creativeness necessary >> to be a strong representative for OpenSolaris. She has shown all of >> those attributes as a leader of the Documentation Community. >> >> dsc >> _______________________________________________ >> cab-discuss mailing list >> cab-discuss at opensolaris.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org From benr at cuddletech.com Mon Feb 26 13:59:41 2007 From: benr at cuddletech.com (Ben Rockwood) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:59:41 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45E3584D.2020500@cuddletech.com> As a core contrib I enthusiastically second the nomination of Dr. Stephen Hahn and Mr. Cyril Plisko. benr. From al at logical-approach.com Mon Feb 26 18:12:40 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:12:40 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd Message-ID: I'd like to make a change to the proposed OGB election calendar and get 2 or more +1 votes to make it official and then post separate announcements to os-discuss, os-announce and cab-discuss. The issue is, that there has been no official notice of the OGB elections other than in cab-discuss. The proposed schedule is: NB: All times are PST (Pacific) Election process event Effective Timestamp -------------------------- ------------------- Nominations Open now Nominations Close Mon Feb 5th (midnight PST) Campaigning open Tue Mar 6th (00:00 hours PST) Voter registration additions closed Thur Mar 8th (midnight PST) Campaigning close Sun Mar 11th (midnight PST) Election open Mon Mar 12th (00:00 hours PST) Election close Mon Mar 26th (midnight PST) Election results posted Tue Mar 27th (sometime) Essentially I'm stealing some days from the campaign period in order to provide a reasonable window for nominations - given that the election calendar gets widely published tomorrow. Need an up or down vote or an alternative election schedule proposal. PS: I've started an OGB election status page at: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/OGB_Election_Status/ Thanks, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Mon Feb 26 18:30:53 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:30:53 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070227023053.GA17362@sun.com> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 08:12:40PM -0600, Al Hopper wrote: > I'd like to make a change to the proposed OGB election calendar and get 2 > or more +1 votes to make it official and then post separate announcements > to os-discuss, os-announce and cab-discuss. The issue is, that there has > been no official notice of the OGB elections other than in cab-discuss. > The proposed schedule is: > > NB: All times are PST (Pacific) > > Election process event Effective Timestamp > -------------------------- ------------------- > Nominations Open now > Nominations Close Mon Feb 5th (midnight PST) I assume this ought to be 5 March, not 5 February. Also, midnight =is= 00:00 hours, and belongs to tbe "next" day (just as element 0 belongs to the array), so you probably really want to close things at the last minute of the previous day so that people don't wake up thinking they've got a whole day when in fact the deadline has already passed. It's also nice to quote times in UTC even though I understand the advantage of "just do it any time this day as long as you're east of US/Pacific"). Finally, Daylight Savings Time begins 11 March in the US, so it's wrong to use PST after that time. These changes would leave us with: Nominations close, Mon 05 Mar 0759 UTC / 2359 PST[0] Campainging begins Voter registration Thu 08 Mar 0759 UTC / 2359 PST deadline Campaigning close, Sun 11 Mar 0759 UTC / 2359 PST Election open Election close Mon 26 Mar 0659 UTC / 2359 PDT[0] Election results posted Tue 27 Mar [0] PST == US/Pacific Standard Time; PDT == US/Pacific Daylight Time > Essentially I'm stealing some days from the campaign period in order to > provide a reasonable window for nominations - given that the election > calendar gets widely published tomorrow. What does it mean for campaigning to end? Are candidates expected to not post to mailing lists during the election, or are we expected to avoid posting opinions, or simply to avoid referencing our candidacy? For that matter, why is this even important? I don't mean to nitpick, but it's best if everyone understand the rules before being asked to follow them. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From ian at ianshome.com Mon Feb 26 18:32:03 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:32:03 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E39823.4050903@ianshome.com> Al Hopper wrote: >I'd like to make a change to the proposed OGB election calendar and get 2 >or more +1 votes to make it official and then post separate announcements >to os-discuss, os-announce and cab-discuss. The issue is, that there has >been no official notice of the OGB elections other than in cab-discuss. >The proposed schedule is: > >NB: All times are PST (Pacific) > >Election process event Effective Timestamp >-------------------------- ------------------- >Nominations Open now >Nominations Close Mon Feb 5th (midnight PST) > > > Shouldn't that be Mon *Mar* 5th? Ian From keith.wesolowski at sun.com Mon Feb 26 18:33:20 2007 From: keith.wesolowski at sun.com (Keith M Wesolowski) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:33:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <20070227023053.GA17362@sun.com> References: <20070227023053.GA17362@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070227023320.GB17362@sun.com> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 06:30:53PM -0800, Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > Campaigning close, Sun 11 Mar 0759 UTC / 2359 PST > Election open This should of course be PDT as well since it's after 2am/3am. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From rich.teer at rite-group.com Mon Feb 26 19:09:09 2007 From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:09:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Al Hopper wrote: > I'd like to make a change to the proposed OGB election calendar and get 2 > or more +1 votes to make it official and then post separate announcements > to os-discuss, os-announce and cab-discuss. The issue is, that there has > been no official notice of the OGB elections other than in cab-discuss. > The proposed schedule is: > > NB: All times are PST (Pacific) > > Election process event Effective Timestamp > -------------------------- ------------------- > Nominations Open now > Nominations Close Mon Feb 5th (midnight PST) +1, with these comments: 1. Nomination close March 5. Unless you've invented a time machine. :-) 2. Use 23:59 as the ending time rather than 00:00. 3. Use "Pacific" instead of "PST", thus avoiding the nonsense with time changing. 4. Sorry for not sending out a draft announcement; I was swammped over the weekend (and still am). -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich From fielding at gbiv.com Mon Feb 26 20:34:21 2007 From: fielding at gbiv.com (Roy T. Fielding) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:34:21 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <91116D94-78A7-4F6B-9ED4-0C72AD872E33@gbiv.com> On Feb 26, 2007, at 7:09 PM, Rich Teer wrote: > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Al Hopper wrote: > >> I'd like to make a change to the proposed OGB election calendar >> and get 2 >> or more +1 votes to make it official and then post separate >> announcements >> to os-discuss, os-announce and cab-discuss. The issue is, that >> there has >> been no official notice of the OGB elections other than in cab- >> discuss. >> The proposed schedule is: >> >> NB: All times are PST (Pacific) >> >> Election process event Effective Timestamp >> -------------------------- ------------------- >> Nominations Open now >> Nominations Close Mon Feb 5th (midnight PST) > > +1, with these comments: > > 1. Nomination close March 5. Unless you've invented a time > machine. :-) > > 2. Use 23:59 as the ending time rather than 00:00. > > 3. Use "Pacific" instead of "PST", thus avoiding the nonsense with > time changing. +1 ....Roy From Casper.Dik at sun.com Tue Feb 27 00:38:56 2007 From: Casper.Dik at sun.com (Casper.Dik at sun.com) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:38:56 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200702270839.l1R8d3PK014063@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> >2. Use 23:59 as the ending time rather than 00:00. Why not use 24:00; it's not as ugly as 23:59 and isn't ambiguous either. Casper From michelle.olson at sun.com Tue Feb 27 05:19:01 2007 From: michelle.olson at sun.com (Michelle Olson) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 05:19:01 PST Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: Nomination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1959663.1172582371145.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Thank you David, I'm thrilled to accept. I'll put together some campaign thoughts and post them to my blog. -Michelle This message posted from opensolaris.org From al at logical-approach.com Tue Feb 27 09:15:56 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:15:56 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <20070227023053.GA17362@sun.com> References: <20070227023053.GA17362@sun.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 08:12:40PM -0600, Al Hopper wrote: > .... snip calendar related verbage .... > > What does it mean for campaigning to end? Are candidates expected to While the campaigning period is open, candidates would be expected and encouraged to promote themselves and their philoscopies using the OpenSolaris mailing lists and to provide pointers to their blogs etc. > not post to mailing lists during the election, or are we expected to > avoid posting opinions, or simply to avoid referencing our candidacy? The intent is that candidates don't generate an unusual level of activity on OpenSolaris in order to promote their candidacy. For example, if someone generally posted one or 2 messages per day to (again an example) zfs-discuss, and then, during the election period, generated all manner of postings across a wide range of mailing lists - that would be intrepreted as campaigning - an attempt to influence the voting population by "plastering" their name project wide. So a candidate would be expected to maintain a "business as usual" presence on the mailing lists and is free to respond to election related questions that might be posed by a voter. > For that matter, why is this even important? I don't mean to nitpick, If it was considered OK for a candidate to generate unusual levels of email across a wide number of OpenSolaris lists during the election period, then the other candidates would feel pressured to do the same and our technical forums would turn into OGB election related "spam" for two weeks. > but it's best if everyone understand the rules before being asked to > follow them. Agreed. > -- > Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" > FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From johansen-osdev at sun.com Tue Feb 27 11:20:20 2007 From: johansen-osdev at sun.com (johansen-osdev at sun.com) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:20:20 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: <20070227023053.GA17362@sun.com> Message-ID: <20070227192020.GB25766@eng.sun.com> Hi Al, > > What does it mean for campaigning to end? > > For that matter, why is this even important? I don't mean to nitpick, > > If it was considered OK for a candidate to generate unusual levels of > email across a wide number of OpenSolaris lists during the election > period, then the other candidates would feel pressured to do the same and > our technical forums would turn into OGB election related "spam" for two > weeks. This policy is going to be difficult to enforce. Assuming that candidates abide by the prescribed decorum, is it reasonable to expect that other people won't continue to campaign on behalf of the candidates? As an example, can Swift Boat Veterans for OpenSolaris continue to post to mailing lists after campaigning has ended? I'm having a difficult time imagining how we can force parties who aren't candidates to stop advocating a particular viewpoint after campaiging has closed. Aren't the candidates at a disadvantage if we prevent them from participating in political discussions just because campaiging has ended? I may have misunderstood what the proposal is; however, I do think Keith has a valid point: is it important to try to limit what and when candidates may express opinions? It would be my preference to avoid any kind of restrictions. -j From al at logical-approach.com Tue Feb 27 12:10:16 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:10:16 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <20070227192020.GB25766@eng.sun.com> References: <20070227023053.GA17362@sun.com> <20070227192020.GB25766@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 johansen-osdev at sun.com wrote: > Hi Al, > > > > What does it mean for campaigning to end? > > > > For that matter, why is this even important? I don't mean to nitpick, > > > > If it was considered OK for a candidate to generate unusual levels of > > email across a wide number of OpenSolaris lists during the election > > period, then the other candidates would feel pressured to do the same and > > our technical forums would turn into OGB election related "spam" for two > > weeks. > > This policy is going to be difficult to enforce. Assuming that candidates > abide by the prescribed decorum, is it reasonable to expect that other > people won't continue to campaign on behalf of the candidates? As an Of course that's reasonable and I'm sure that is exactly what will happen. > example, can Swift Boat Veterans for OpenSolaris continue to post to > mailing lists after campaigning has ended? > > I'm having a difficult time imagining how we can force parties who > aren't candidates to stop advocating a particular viewpoint after > campaiging has closed. Aren't the candidates at a disadvantage if we > prevent them from participating in political discussions just because > campaiging has ended? I may have misunderstood what the proposal is; And this point was covered in the email that you are responding to. Quoting myself: AH> So a candidate would be expected to maintain a "business as usual" AH> presence on the mailing lists and is free to respond to election related AH> questions that might be posed by a voter. > however, I do think Keith has a valid point: is it important to try to > limit what and when candidates may express opinions? It would be my I don't see where you are getting this from. There is no attempt to "try to limit what and when candidates may express opinions". All we are saying is that candidates *campaigning* must end at the end of the campaign period. Then they maintain a "business as usual" presence on the project and are "free to respond to election related questions that might be posed by a voter" during the election period (2 weeks). Here's a definition of campaigning from dictionary.com that might be useful: ""An operation or series of operations energetically pursued to accomplish a purpose: an advertising campaign for a new product; a candidate's political campaign."" > preference to avoid any kind of restrictions. I could characterize the entire OpenSolaris.org project as a project with a casual and tolerant attitude where there are few restrictions. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From sch at eng.sun.com Tue Feb 27 11:58:56 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:58:56 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Draft poll.opensolaris.org instructions Message-ID: <20070227195856.GA18980@eng.sun.com> Some of the opensolaris.org machines are being physically moved (more power!), so my voting zone isn't quite built yet. In the meanwhile, please review the following draft help/instructions for using poll.opensolaris.org. http://opensolaris.org/os/project/website/poll_instructions/ For reference, I've attached screenshots of what the poll.opensolaris.org website looks like (i.e., the "polls" and "grants" tabs mentioned in the help). - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: polls.png Type: image/png Size: 243683 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: grants.png Type: image/png Size: 260152 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stevel at sun.com Tue Feb 27 13:34:26 2007 From: stevel at sun.com (Stephen Lau) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 13:34:26 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45E4A3E2.4050308@sun.com> Garrett D'Amore wrote: > 4) I'd also like to nominate the following persons for OGB leadership, > * Rich Lowe (other stuff snipped) +1 I'd very much like to see Rich Lowe in the OGB. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development From alan.coopersmith at sun.com Tue Feb 27 13:45:31 2007 From: alan.coopersmith at sun.com (Alan Coopersmith) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 13:45:31 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] nomination In-Reply-To: <45E4A3E2.4050308@sun.com> References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> <45E4A3E2.4050308@sun.com> Message-ID: <45E4A67B.5050402@sun.com> Stephen Lau wrote: > Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> 4) I'd also like to nominate the following persons for OGB leadership, >> * Rich Lowe > > (other stuff snipped) > > +1 > I'd very much like to see Rich Lowe in the OGB. +1 -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering February 2007 Selection: LSARC Chair of the Month Club From binarycrusader at gmail.com Tue Feb 27 14:44:36 2007 From: binarycrusader at gmail.com (Shawn Walker) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 09:44:36 +1100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognised as a core contributor Message-ID: Greetings, I have been involved in the Solaris and OpenSolaris community for some time now (since a few months before the official launch of the OpenSolaris project). I am a registered contributor (# OS0004) though my RTIs so far have been trivial in nature. I maintain a Solaris-related blog with tips and commentary for developers (http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com) and participate on a regular basis in community discussions. For which community I should be considered a contributor, I do not know. What I do know is that since the first day the OpenSolaris project was announced I have been following it with great interest and have a strong desire to see it succeed. Thanks, -- "Less is only more where more is no good." --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst binarycrusader at gmail.com - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ From James.McPherson at Sun.COM Tue Feb 27 14:47:37 2007 From: James.McPherson at Sun.COM (James C. McPherson) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 09:47:37 +1100 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognised as a core contributor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E4B509.8050004@Sun.COM> Shawn Walker wrote: > Greetings, > > I have been involved in the Solaris and OpenSolaris community for some > time now (since a few months before the official launch of the > OpenSolaris project). I am a registered contributor (# OS0004) though > my RTIs so far have been trivial in nature. I maintain a > Solaris-related blog with tips and commentary for developers > (http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com) and participate on a regular > basis in community discussions. > > For which community I should be considered a contributor, I do not know. > > What I do know is that since the first day the OpenSolaris project was > announced I have been following it with great interest and have a > strong desire to see it succeed. Dear CAB, I recommend that Shawn Walker be recognised as a core contributor. James C. McPherson -- Solaris kernel software engineer Sun Microsystems From stevel at sun.com Tue Feb 27 14:48:14 2007 From: stevel at sun.com (Stephen Lau) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:48:14 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognised as a core contributor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45E4B52E.3040407@sun.com> Shawn Walker wrote: > Greetings, > > I have been involved in the Solaris and OpenSolaris community for some > time now (since a few months before the official launch of the > OpenSolaris project). I am a registered contributor (# OS0004) though > my RTIs so far have been trivial in nature. I maintain a > Solaris-related blog with tips and commentary for developers > (http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com) and participate on a regular > basis in community discussions. > > For which community I should be considered a contributor, I do not know. > > What I do know is that since the first day the OpenSolaris project was > announced I have been following it with great interest and have a > strong desire to see it succeed. > > Thanks, +1 Seems reasonable to me that Shawn could be a contributor at large. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM Tue Feb 27 15:33:59 2007 From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:33:59 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] Request to be recognised as a core contributor In-Reply-To: <45E4B509.8050004@Sun.COM> References: <45E4B509.8050004@Sun.COM> Message-ID: On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, James C. McPherson wrote: > Shawn Walker wrote: >> Greetings, >> >> I have been involved in the Solaris and OpenSolaris community for some >> time now (since a few months before the official launch of the >> OpenSolaris project). I am a registered contributor (# OS0004) though >> my RTIs so far have been trivial in nature. I maintain a >> Solaris-related blog with tips and commentary for developers >> (http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com) and participate on a regular >> basis in community discussions. >> >> For which community I should be considered a contributor, I do not know. >> >> What I do know is that since the first day the OpenSolaris project was >> announced I have been following it with great interest and have a >> strong desire to see it succeed. > > > Dear CAB, > I recommend that Shawn Walker be recognised as a > core contributor. +1 From sch at eng.sun.com Tue Feb 27 15:36:51 2007 From: sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:36:51 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] poll.opensolaris.org: First grant load Message-ID: <20070227233651.GA19953@eng.sun.com> I did a load against a static copy of the user data from a month ago and uploaded it to the grants DataTable on poll.opensolaris.org. (There are 16 grants missing; they'll arrive tomorrow, when I do a reload against the most recent data.) That said, there are 503 grants of Contributor or Core Contributor status, so initial validation--am I on the list?, etc.--can start now. See http://poll.opensolaris.org Although I'm waiting on review feedback, I'm pretty much ready to take the questionnaire, once final wording and inclusiveness (Participant, Contributor, or Core Contributor as minimum required status) are settled. Oh, and how many priorities we want to count as approved by the vote (3, 5, 10?). - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ From sommerfeld at sun.com Tue Feb 27 16:06:41 2007 From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 19:06:41 -0500 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1172621201.670.51.camel@thunk> On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 20:12 -0600, Al Hopper wrote: > Campaigning close Sun Mar 11th (midnight PST) I think it's not worthwhile to specifically call out this milestone or make rules about what behavior is appropriate before or after it. There are a couple of downsides I see: First, the deadline presents an opportunity for game-players to game the elections system by seeking to get in the last word before the gate closes. Second, I don't think meta-arguments about whether or not a message posted during the "polls open" period is or is not campaigning will be a productive use of email bandwidth -- my cynical prediction is that such debates will waste more email bandwidth than the messages which triggered them.. So let's just nuke this from the calendar. In any event, I'm unlikely to vote for a candidate who spews too much. I suspect enough of the electorate shares this view that this will form an effective check on campaigning by people best qualified to serve. (oh, and by "email bandwidth", I'm referring to the time/effort required by recipients to deal with the message..) - Bill From rich.teer at rite-group.com Tue Feb 27 17:38:06 2007 From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:38:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <200702270839.l1R8d3PK014063@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> References: <200702270839.l1R8d3PK014063@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote: > >2. Use 23:59 as the ending time rather than 00:00. > > Why not use 24:00; it's not as ugly as 23:59 and isn't ambiguous either. The pedant in me would point out that apart from the very occassional leap second, there's no such time as 24:00. :-) And I wouldn't agree that 23:59 is ambiguous. It's a precise time, and the intent ("before Midnight") is clear. -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich From ian at ianshome.com Tue Feb 27 17:51:24 2007 From: ian at ianshome.com (Ian Collins) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:51:24 +1300 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: <200702270839.l1R8d3PK014063@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> Message-ID: <45E4E01C.4000303@ianshome.com> Rich Teer wrote: >On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote: > > > >>>2. Use 23:59 as the ending time rather than 00:00. >>> >>> >>Why not use 24:00; it's not as ugly as 23:59 and isn't ambiguous either. >> >> > >The pedant in me would point out that apart from the very occassional >leap second, there's no such time as 24:00. :-) And I wouldn't agree >that 23:59 is ambiguous. It's a precise time, and the intent ("before >Midnight") is clear. > > > That's what I thought, so I had a look and came up with this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24-hour_clock Looks like I've been wrong all these years! Ian From al at logical-approach.com Tue Feb 27 18:05:54 2007 From: al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:05:54 -0600 (CST) Subject: [cab-discuss] poll.opensolaris.org: First grant load In-Reply-To: <20070227233651.GA19953@eng.sun.com> References: <20070227233651.GA19953@eng.sun.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > I did a load against a static copy of the user data from a month ago > and uploaded it to the grants DataTable on poll.opensolaris.org. > (There are 16 grants missing; they'll arrive tomorrow, when I do a > reload against the most recent data.) > > That said, there are 503 grants of Contributor or Core Contributor > status, so initial validation--am I on the list?, etc.--can start > now. > > See > > http://poll.opensolaris.org > > Although I'm waiting on review feedback, I'm pretty much ready to > take the questionnaire, once final wording and inclusiveness > (Participant, Contributor, or Core Contributor as minimum required > status) are settled. Oh, and how many priorities we want to count as > approved by the vote (3, 5, 10?). [as usual] Stephen you've easily exceeded my expectations for the first cut of the Grants table. Kudos to you and you (hidden) helpers. A couple of points/suggestions: a) It may not be obvious, to the casual observer, that the table can be sorted by clicking on the (blue) headings. Perhaps a small note to indicate that this feature is available, or, if you really want to get fancy, a javascript popup to indicate what will happen if you click on the "link". b) When you sort by "Community", can you make the default display be ordered by "Community" as the primary sort key and the "ID" column as the secondary sort key. This will make if easier to find a user by Community/ID. c) Same as suggestion b) for sorting by "Status" and "Expiration Date". d) NB: much lower priority. When you sort by "Name" the "almost" ideal, but quick to implement, algorithm would: i) count the tokens that represent the name: if the count == 3, discard the 'middle' token. That is, convert "Keith M Wesolowski" or "Keith M. Wesolowski" (notice the dot) into "Keith Wesolowski". Now you have a still somewhat imperfect two token representation of the name. ii) now sort by the 2nd-token/1st-token as the primary/secondary sort keys. The ideal algorithm would get more complicated in a hurry and I'm not even going to go there. Because we've probably already reached the point of diminishing returns and satisfied 98% of the user community without any further effort. One (easy to implement) improvement to the above, would be to eliminate characters like "." (dot) and "'" using a regular expression before applying step i) above. The suggestions I've made are concentrated in one area of useability only: allowing a user of the site to find a contributor quickly and easily. And this is exactly what I'll be asking the user community to do before we close the door on adding any core contributors 3 days before OGB voting begins. Execellent work Stephen! Many Thanks for you hard work. :) Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al at logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 From rich.teer at rite-group.com Tue Feb 27 18:49:36 2007 From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:49:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <45E4E01C.4000303@ianshome.com> References: <200702270839.l1R8d3PK014063@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> <45E4E01C.4000303@ianshome.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, Ian Collins wrote: > That's what I thought, so I had a look and came up with this: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24-hour_clock Well, well! I sit corrected! -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich From garrett at damore.org Tue Feb 27 20:56:59 2007 From: garrett at damore.org (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:56:59 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <1172621201.670.51.camel@thunk> References: <1172621201.670.51.camel@thunk> Message-ID: <45E50B9B.3040205@damore.org> Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 20:12 -0600, Al Hopper wrote: > >> Campaigning close Sun Mar 11th (midnight PST) >> > > I think it's not worthwhile to specifically call out this milestone or > make rules about what behavior is appropriate before or after it. > > There are a couple of downsides I see: > > First, the deadline presents an opportunity for game-players to game the > elections system by seeking to get in the last word before the gate > closes. > > Second, I don't think meta-arguments about whether or not a message > posted during the "polls open" period is or is not campaigning will be a > productive use of email bandwidth -- my cynical prediction is that such > debates will waste more email bandwidth than the messages which > triggered them.. > > So let's just nuke this from the calendar. > > In any event, I'm unlikely to vote for a candidate who spews too much. > I suspect enough of the electorate shares this view that this will form > an effective check on campaigning by people best qualified to serve. > > (oh, and by "email bandwidth", I'm referring to the time/effort required > by recipients to deal with the message..) > Well, it seems to me that a way to mitigate impact of the OGB elections on "other useful work" is to proceed by having: 1) OGB position statements _not_ sent to mailing lists, but posted on a common site (candidates.opensolaris.org anyone?). 2) a _single_ message sent by whatever election "officials" are around, notifying the community (via -announce) of the location of position statements. 3) a separate list (subscribed to by all candidates, automatically) like "candidates@" for questions and any followup discussion pertaining to the OGB elections 4) all other e-mail lists should follow their reasonable moderation policies per on-topic vs. off-topic lists (candidates that violate basic common sense here will naturally be penalized, I think.) Anyway. Just a thought. -- Garrett > - Bill > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cab-discuss mailing list > cab-discuss at opensolaris.org > From Casper.Dik at sun.com Tue Feb 27 22:57:26 2007 From: Casper.Dik at sun.com (Casper.Dik at sun.com) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 07:57:26 +0100 Subject: [cab-discuss] election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: References: <200702270839.l1R8d3PK014063@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> Message-ID: <200702280657.l1S6vZib012672@vaticaan.holland.sun.com> >On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote: > >> >2. Use 23:59 as the ending time rather than 00:00. >> >> Why not use 24:00; it's not as ugly as 23:59 and isn't ambiguous either. > >The pedant in me would point out that apart from the very occassional >leap second, there's no such time as 24:00. :-) And I wouldn't agree >that 23:59 is ambiguous. It's a precise time, and the intent ("before >Midnight") is clear. No; 24:00 is a well-defined time meaning "the end of day". (Or perhaps the time "epsilon" removed from 0:00 the next day) (The leap second would be 23:59:60) Casper From rlhamil at smart.net Tue Feb 27 23:22:26 2007 From: rlhamil at smart.net (Richard L. Hamilton) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:22:26 PST Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <11426293.1172647441012.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> > PS: I've started an OGB election status page at: > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/OGB_Election_Status/ If my listing as a nominee was not an error, while I appreciate the thought, I respectfully decline. Roles and titles exceed my imagination, so it's perhaps better if they also exceed my ambition. [i]In[/i]formal participation, that I can handle, as long as none of great tact, organizational skill, or attending meetings are required. Now if I were younger, pizza and coding all night, that might be fun... This message posted from opensolaris.org From garrett at damore.org Tue Feb 27 23:46:44 2007 From: garrett at damore.org (Garrett D'Amore) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:46:44 -0800 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <11426293.1172647441012.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> References: <11426293.1172647441012.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> Message-ID: <45E53364.7060203@damore.org> Richard L. Hamilton wrote: >> PS: I've started an OGB election status page at: >> >> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/OGB_Election_Status/ >> > > I missed the original message that had that, but I'd like to request two changes to my entry. First, please change my e-mail address to garrett at damore.org. (I've changed my os.o lists and registration already.) Second, please mark my nomination "accepted". :-) I will be coming back to work within Sun (as a contractor) within the next few weeks, and will be updating my blog accordingly with details, so my affiliation (which is not recorded on the above page) will need to be updated as well. Thanks. -- Garrett From rlhamil at smart.net Tue Feb 27 23:57:05 2007 From: rlhamil at smart.net (Richard L. Hamilton) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:57:05 PST Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: Re: election calendar decision reqd In-Reply-To: <45E53364.7060203@damore.org> Message-ID: <28117651.1172649455050.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> I'm sure Tadpole's loss is Sun's gain. Hopefully, your successor at Tadpole will also participate here, although I understand if you can't comment on that. This message posted from opensolaris.org From John.Plocher at Sun.COM Wed Feb 28 00:18:07 2007 From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 13:48:07 +0530 Subject: [cab-discuss] Re: nomination In-Reply-To: References: <45D3A294.9080305@sun.com> <45D3E43B.5040305@tadpole.com> Message-ID: <45E53ABF.8030406@Sun.Com> Eric Boutilier wrote: > Therefore, I'd like to nominate the following: > ... list of fantastic candidates... Thank you for the honor of putting my name on a list of amazing community leaders, but at this time I don't feel that I can devote the time and energy needed to do the OGB job the way I would want without compromising my other family and community commitments. Maybe next time... Regretfully, -John Plocher