Fwd: [cab-discuss] CAB conf call

[Casper.Dik at 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