[opensolaris-summit] Brandorr's comments on proposed Summit topics

[John Plocher]

Brandorr wrote:
> John Plocher  ...
> Problem: ...

Focusing on Indiana:

Indiana is all about building a system (aka distro) out of OS.o parts.
The ARC is a systems architecture body.

What can the ARC do for Indiana?
     That is, what does Indiana need from the ARC so Indiana can be
     successful for its various releases?

    [The ideas I've heard concern things like refactoring "the WOS"
     to allow different rates of change in the various sections,
     keeping the "core" of OpenSolaris completely compatible while
     allowing incompatible and disruptive innovation to happen
     closer to the edge.  What explicit actions are needed to
     make that a reality?]

What can Indiana do for the ARC?
     Since it is an "Us-ARCing-Our-Stuff" world, what ARC-related
     resources are Indiana developers willing or able to provide to
     help deliver those things?  (Or is the expectation really
     "Us-vs-Them", where someone /else/ is expected to do the
     ARC work?)  In any case, what does the ARC community need
     to do to ensure that those resources are effectively and
     productively used?

How does the existing community structure need to change?
     What should happen when the systems architectural needs
     of Indiana conflict with those of Solaris or one of the
     other distros?

     Should there be an "Indiana ARC", a "Solaris ARC", a
     "Schillix ARC", ...etc?  If so, where does an "OpenSolaris
     ARC" fit?  What is in and out of scope for each?  The needs
     of a kernel.org-style community are not the same as the
     needs of an ubuntu-style one.  What needs to be done to
     move the larger OS.o community from its current
     kernel.org-ish mindset to more of the uubuntu-style one
     that Indiana envisions?




> Problem:  How are appeals handled?  Who makes the unpopular 
> decisions?  Where is the "teeth"?  


You are right - this is bigger than just Indiana.  Nevertheless, for
context, if nothing else:

>               As I understand there is a Constitution that handles 
> appeals. Unpopular with whom? Teeth??


Say the ARC says "do /this/" or even "we don't approve this proposal",
and the project team or its sponsoring community disagrees.  This is
a common situation where the short term needs of a project may conflict
with the long term needs of the larger OS.o community.  20 years of Sun
experience shows that there needs to be an intermediate step in those
"appeals" to ensure that they all don't immediately overload the OGB
with hearings or cause expensive OS.o community-wide formal votes.

What happens if a project or community chooses to make architectural-
level changes to an OS.o component without engaging with the ARC?  Who
gets to choose whether or not ARCing applies to something?  Even if
one is in a part of the OS.o community where the ARC is known to
apply, what happens if a project [tries to] integrate without doing
an ARC review?  If they get stopped, who does the stopping? By what
authority does the stopper actually obtain the right to stop it?
That's teeth.