[opensolaris-summit] My comments (very subjective) on proposed Summit topics

[Philip Brown]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 04:57:40PM -0700, Darren Reed wrote:
> Philip Brown wrote:
> >Isnt that what the (previously named?) "CAB" is for?
> 
>...
> 
> How would that be different to the OGB?  No open board-discuss
> for starters.  Have it function like a real board: meet monthly or
> quarterly, publish the minutes of the meetings, appoint a chairman,
> give the board power to make decisions that change opensolaris
> without needing votes, etc...

The one trouble with doing stuff politically like that, is that there is
then a tendancy for those positions to be filled with politicians.
There need to be rules, but not to the point of needing a 
"full time politician" to handle it, so to speak.

> >You cant make everyone happy, all the time.
> >Obviously, some groups are going to be unhappy to be moved down. Doesnt
> >mean it shouldnt be done.
> 
> Yes.  And so long as we allow even one "I disagree" to hold up change,
> we'll never really accomplish very much at all in a timely fashion.

The one softening I would like to add to my comments, is a clarification of
my general principles on that sort of thing.

"We shouldnt do it because x,y/z" should be carefully considered.
Whines about, "I dont like it/I dont want to change", should be ignored,
in my opinion [if the change has long term benefits]

A single person dissenting, doesnt mean that single person should be
automatically ignored, though. The more important question is whether the
dissent is on rational grounds or not.
(and it then becomes important for the people making that determination, to
 be both mentally able to discern that, and also to have the commitment and
integrity to do so. Having a "majority vote" is no substitute for technical
competance and understanding)