[cab-discuss] Re: CAB conf call - communication

[Simon Phipps]

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.  <sarcasm> Perhaps his/her _first_  
> contribution to
> OpenSolaris will be related to changing the licensing terms of the
> project. </sarcasm>

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.