Pilot Conversation: 3/1/05 to 3/7/05
CAB Election Results
Original Message
Subject: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 21:14:38 -0800
From: James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>
To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Here are the election results for the first annual OpenSolaris Community
Advisory Board:
21 Al Hopper *
20 Rich Teer *
16 Ben Rockwood
14 Joerg Schilling
13 Pieter Van den Abeele
09 Phil Brown
08 James Dickens
Total Voters: 39
Congratulations, Al and Rich! You are on the CAB. I'll get you guys
details about coming to California for the first CAB meeting as soon as
I can. Sun will be selecting the other three members shortly. We are
making plans to announce the entire CAB publically. There will need to
be some phone meetings with all five members before we make this
announcement, though. More info on that shortly as well. Please note
that the CAB pilot election results are private at this point, so please
don't blog it yet.
Congrats to you all especially to those who ran in this election and
put yourselves out there for consideration. The participation in this
exercise was absolutely outstanding. We're almost there.
Jim G.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 05:27:51 +0000
From: Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk>
To: James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>, opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Jim: Great job. This is the beginning of great things and
important times; and you are doing *real well* thus far. I
am a bit sad that only 39 voters made their feelings known -
I would have hoped that the enthusiasm that I believe we all
share for the success of OpenSolaris would have brought out
more contributors to the election process.
Al / Rich: Many congratulations on being worthy "winners"
(watch out for that poison chalice ;-) ), and very best of
luck for the coming months.
Ben: A great third place, and be certain in the fact that we
will never not listen to nor appreciate your thoughts and
opinions.
Others: Only 12 months to the next elections ;-)
Sean
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:34:59 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Hopper <al@logical-approach.com>
To: James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Congratulations, Al and Rich! You are on the CAB. I'll get you guys
Wow - that came as a surprise! Many thanks to all my supporters and
especially to those who spurred me on in private email etc.
I take the nomination very seriously and will do everything in my power to
further OpenSolaris and the community over the next 12 months.
Jim - thanks for your incredible efforts to date and your stewardship of
the opensolaris list - you've changing Sun as we know it .. and I forward
to meeting you, and all the OpenSolaris program participants shortly.
Al Hopper
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 05:49:28 +0000
From: Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk>
To: Al Hopper <al@logical-approach.com>
CC: James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>, opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Al,
Congratulations. Well done.
> I take the nomination very seriously and will do everything in my power to
> further OpenSolaris and the community over the next 12 months.
That's exactly what we want to hear; especially from Jim's
point of view the furthering of the community.. I am sure
that you and Rich will champion the cause to great effect.
You should get "OpenSolaris CAB Member" t-shirts specially
printed - limited edition of 5 ;-)
> Jim - thanks for your incredible efforts to date and your stewardship of
> the opensolaris list - you've changing Sun as we know it .. and I forward
> to meeting you, and all the OpenSolaris program participants shortly.
Well, getting OpenSolaris Pilot participants together will
be a tough ask; given the fact that last time I read, the
top three participating countries in reverse order were USA,
India, and UK; but we do need to meet somehow, somewhere...
Best of luck!
Sean.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:01:04 -0800
From: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Reply-To: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Organization: Solaris x86 Engineering
To: Al Hopper <al@logical-approach.com>, James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tuesday 01 March 2005 09:34 pm, Al Hopper wrote:
> I take the nomination very seriously and will do everything in my power to
> further OpenSolaris and the community over the next 12 months.
Congrats, and best of luck with the CAB Al!
> Jim - thanks for your incredible efforts to date and your stewardship of
> the opensolaris list - you've changing Sun as we know it .. and I forward
> to meeting you, and all the OpenSolaris program participants shortly.
Jim did a swell job, I agree. I look forward to seeing you again, if the CAB
comes out to CA, even if I can't understand you...<LOL!> Texas is in the
U.S., isn't it?
Alan DuBoff
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 07:41:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com>
To: James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
References: <42254BBE.5090802@sun.com>
Wow, my first brush with politics, and I get into office and I didn't
even have to kiss any babies!
Seriously, thanks to everyone who voted for me: I hope I can live up
to your expectations.
Today the CAB, tomorrow the world! Bwahahahahah!
Rich Teer
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 10:47:16 -0500
From: Dennis Clarke <blastwave@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Dennis Clarke <blastwave@gmail.com>
To: Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com>
CC: James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>, opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> > Congratulations, Al and Rich! You are on the CAB. I'll get you guys
>
> Wow, my first brush with politics, and I get into office and I didn't
> even have to kiss any babies!
No, but you wrote one hell of a book Rich.
Dennis Clarke
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:50:36 -0600
From: James Dickens <jamesd.wi@gmail.com>
Reply-To: James Dickens <jamesd.wi@gmail.com>
To: Dennis Clarke <blastwave@gmail.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
strange usually real policticians write the book after they leave office
James
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:05:30 +0100
From: Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
To: sks@cvok.co.uk, opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM
Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk> wrote:
> Jim: Great job. This is the beginning of great things and
> important times; and you are doing *real well* thus far. I
> am a bit sad that only 39 voters made their feelings known -
> I would have hoped that the enthusiasm that I believe we all
> share for the success of OpenSolaris would have brought out
> more contributors to the election process.
I am also a bit sad about the low poll. I woiuld have expected twice
as much voters.
Jörg
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 10:03:36 -0800
From: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Reply-To: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Organization: Solaris x86 Engineering
To: Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com>, James Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Wednesday 02 March 2005 07:41 am, Rich Teer wrote:
> Wow, my first brush with politics, and I get into office and I didn't
> even have to kiss any babies!
Don't those politicians have to kiss babies during their terms also?
And NO, that doesn't mean you can go around kissing the cute 16 year old
girls!!!! You know, politicians get confused about that...:-/
> Seriously, thanks to everyone who voted for me: I hope I can live up
> to your expectations.
Congrats! Maybe I'll get to meet you if you come out to (the real) CA [1]
again.
Alan DuBoff
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 10:46:02 -0800
From: Ben Rockwood <benr@cuddletech.com>
To: Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
CC: sks@cvok.co.uk, opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM
Joerg Schilling wrote:
>Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Jim: Great job. This is the beginning of great things and
>>important times; and you are doing *real well* thus far. I
>>am a bit sad that only 39 voters made their feelings known -
>>I would have hoped that the enthusiasm that I believe we all
>>share for the success of OpenSolaris would have brought out
>>more contributors to the election process.
>
>I am also a bit sad about the low poll. I woiuld have expected twice
>as much voters.
Agreed. This pilot is made up of people who were added almost
one-by-one and people who really wanted to be involved, and of the more
than 90 people able to vote less than half did. If we can't keep the
interest of pilot members now we'll see the same thing in bigger numbers
later.
Does anyone have suggestions as to how we can increase involvement now?
Does anyone have thoughts on why we might have had such a low turn out?
benr
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 11:50:07 -0800
From: Jim Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>
To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Sean Sprague wrote:
> Well, getting OpenSolaris Pilot participants together will be a tough
> ask; given the fact that last time I read, the top three participating
> countries in reverse order were USA, India, and UK; but we do need to
> meet somehow, somewhere...
Agree. We need to meet. I'd love some suggestions, too, because it's
going to be a challenge to get *everyone* together. The pilot is already
too big. We were *supposed* to have a *small* pilot, remember? :) I
think we need to start out by meeting in small groups at various
conferences Sun events, industry conferences, user groups, whatever.
I'm going to get a schedule of where we'll be and map something out for
the next year. I'm always way behind on this. Also, I'm working with
some of Sun's other Solaris developer program people (developer.com,
bigadmin, open source program office, etc) on just this issue. We need
to start collaborating more internally to leverage all our resource
externally. More on this in a bit.
Also, to the Sun people on this list, take a look at the OpenSolaris
pilot list:
https://www.opensolaris.org/projects/Wiki.jsp?page=OpenSolarisPilotDevelopers
If you are traveling to these countries for conferences or meeting with
customers, tell us on this list and maybe you can hook up with some of
these guys. Or contact the pilot people privately if you are in their area.
Same goes for the external pilot participants ... tell us where you'll
be in your travels and I'll see who we have hanging out there.
This will be easier when we are open, of course, because there will be
many more people involved whose paths will naturally cross.
Jim
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 12:02:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com>
To: Jim Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio@Sun.COM>
CC: Open Solaris <opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org>, Bryan Cantrill <bmc@zion.eng.sun.com>
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Jim Grisanzio wrote:
> Agree. We need to meet. I'd love some suggestions, too, because it's
> going to be a challenge to get *everyone* together. The pilot is already
> too big. We were *supposed* to have a *small* pilot, remember? :) I
> think we need to start out by meeting in small groups at various
> conferences Sun events, industry conferences, user groups, whatever.
Yeah, even if it's just BoFs at those events.
> If you are traveling to these countries for conferences or meeting with
> customers, tell us on this list and maybe you can hook up with some of
> these guys. Or contact the pilot people privately if you are in their area.
>
> Same goes for the external pilot participants ... tell us where you'll
> be in your travels and I'll see who we have hanging out there.
Note to Bryan Cantrill: I see you're coming to Edmonton later this month
to give a presentation on S10. That would be a great time to get together.
If time permits, you could even talk to the attendees about OpenSolaris...\
Rich Teer
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:01:20 -0800
From: Keith M Wesolowski <keith.wesolowski@sun.com>
To: Ben Rockwood <benr@cuddletech.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:46:02AM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote:
> Agreed. This pilot is made up of people who were added almost
> one-by-one and people who really wanted to be involved, and of the more
> than 90 people able to vote less than half did. If we can't keep the
> interest of pilot members now we'll see the same thing in bigger numbers
> later.
>
> Does anyone have suggestions as to how we can increase involvement now?
> Does anyone have thoughts on why we might have had such a low turn out?
While I agree that the turnout was a bit disappointing, I think we
need to keep a few mitigating factors in mind.
There are many legitimate reasons that people may not have voted, such
as lazy approval or absence. Remember that in an approval voting
scheme the null vote is equivalent to approving all candidates.
Perhaps at least a few nonvoters felt comfortable with the entire
slate and did not feel the need to state that explicitly.
It's important to remember that the pilot program, like the larger
Solaris user community, is a mixed bag. Many of the participants may
feel sufficiently enfranchised simply by having access to the code
that they do not desire to become involved in matters of governance as
the CAB's decisions will not affect them. This will doubtless remain
true once we release; some subcommunities such as embedded systems
designers may well have no interest in contributing code to mainline
OpenSolaris and will make their own decisions about what code they use
from it. While I believe the CAB is relevant even to them, the value
proposition is decidedly nonobvious.
We could debate the merits of this kind of "community non-involvement"
but the terms of the license, and specifically the right to fork,
allow each user to determine the extent of his, her, or its
participation in our processes. We might wish that everyone take an
active interest in the CAB membership, but many of the use cases for
OpenSolaris may not require that level of participation.
What proportion of the Solaris community do we believe derives
significant value from participation in governance discussions? If
your answer is "all of it" then our challenge is simply to demonstrate
that value. Personally I think it's significantly less than that, and
that although slightly higher turnout would have been nice, it's not
too surprising. Remember, only 30-60% of eligible Americans vote on
the people who decide what percentage of their paychecks they get to
keep. Despite the international presence of supposedly interested
people in the pilot, is it so stunning that only 35% cast explicit
votes?
Keith
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 23:46:32 -0500
From: Bruce Riddle <briddle@riddleware.com>
To: Keith M Wesolowski <keith.wesolowski@sun.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:46:02AM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote:
>
>>Agreed. This pilot is made up of people who were added almost
>>one-by-one and people who really wanted to be involved, and of the more
>>than 90 people able to vote less than half did. If we can't keep the
>>interest of pilot members now we'll see the same thing in bigger numbers
>>later.
>>
>>Does anyone have suggestions as to how we can increase involvement now?
>>Does anyone have thoughts on why we might have had such a low turn out?
>
> While I agree that the turnout was a bit disappointing, I think we
> need to keep a few mitigating factors in mind.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solarisx86/polls
Check out the voting results of several hundred members.
On the yahoo group.
Without verifying the numbers it's < 5% participation.
perhaps the topics aren't as important but low participation,
is not abnormal.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 21:12:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Max Bruning <max@bruningsystems.com>
Reply-To: max@bruningsystems.com
To: Bruce Riddle <briddle@riddleware.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I did vote, but it wasn't easy to decide based on bios
and what other info I had available. Someone who writes
well (and/or often), isn't necessarily someone who will
interact well with other people. It's hard to say how someone
will interact with others based on their writing. For me,
I would have been happier voting for someone based on
having met them (or heard them speak).
just my 2 cents, and, I guess, a "let's get together".
max
> Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:46:02AM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Agreed. This pilot is made up of people who were added almost
>>>one-by-one and people who really wanted to be involved, and of the more
>>>than 90 people able to vote less than half did. If we can't keep the
>>>interest of pilot members now we'll see the same thing in bigger numbers
>>>later.
>>>
>>>Does anyone have suggestions as to how we can increase involvement now?
>>>Does anyone have thoughts on why we might have had such a low turn out?
>>
>>
>> While I agree that the turnout was a bit disappointing, I think we
>> need to keep a few mitigating factors in mind.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solarisx86/polls
>
> Check out the voting results of several hundred members.
> On the yahoo group.
> Without verifying the numbers it's < 5% participation.
>
> perhaps the topics aren't as important but low participation,
> is not abnormal.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 21:34:35 -0800
From: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@sun.com>
Reply-To: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@sun.com>
Organization: Solaris x86 Engineering
To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Wednesday 02 March 2005 08:46 pm, Bruce Riddle wrote:
> Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:46:02AM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote:
> >>Agreed. This pilot is made up of people who were added almost
> >>one-by-one and people who really wanted to be involved, and of the more
> >>than 90 people able to vote less than half did. If we can't keep the
> >>interest of pilot members now we'll see the same thing in bigger numbers
> >>later.
> >>
> >>Does anyone have suggestions as to how we can increase involvement now?
> >>Does anyone have thoughts on why we might have had such a low turn out?
> >
> > While I agree that the turnout was a bit disappointing, I think we
> > need to keep a few mitigating factors in mind.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solarisx86/polls
>
> Check out the voting results of several hundred members.
> On the yahoo group.
> Without verifying the numbers it's < 5% participation.
>
> perhaps the topics aren't as important but low participation,
> is not abnormal.
I have to disagree with both of you. I was actually a bit disappointed that
there wasn't a larger turnout of voters myself. It is only an email to send
afterall. I can't believe that every person that is in the pilot couldn't
have voted.
Yahoogroups has long been very poor at poll participation, and that is more to
do with various aspects of it, one being how it's done on the yahoo site
interface with a login.
I would encourage all the people on the OpenSolaris pilot to participate, and
to be more vocal on what you would like to see. This is how you can get
points across to the CAB, as it is completed. Sun still needs to appoint
their seats on the CAB, I realize, but that will happen soon I hope since the
announcement is coming in early April.
I think 39 voters represents the amount of active people on the
opensolaris-discuss list, plus some extra, but it doesn't represent the
majority of people in the pilot program to date.
I guess what I'm getting at here is that I would like to see more people from
the pilot program to participate in general, not just to vote, but to express
your thoughts and opinions so that the Community and Sun as a whole can work
together to sort some of the issues and/or concerns that everyone has.
Alan DuBoff
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 21:44:33 -0800
From: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Reply-To: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Organization: Solaris x86 Engineering
To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Max,
I agree with what you say, and sometimes it's difficult to know a person
without meeting them. I have met many of the people on the pilot, and know
most of the people that were nominated and running.
Unfortunately there will probably never be an event where EVERYONE will be
able to get together, and online collaboration will be needed for the long
term. That's ok, IMO, and eventually we'll all meet each other at some time
or another, hopefully.
You'll get a chance to meeting some of the Sun folks, and people in the Bay
area, as I'm working on putting together a user group that will meet in Santa
Clara. There are quite a few folks that are here in the Silicon Valley area,
although not a majority by any means. My hope is that the user group that I
am trying to form at this time will set a template for other folks to start
their own groups. For instance, I met 2 Sun SEs at CEC this past Sunday who
are from San Antonio. Al Hopper is not far from San Antonio. These SEs said
they've already sent flyers out to 200 people and got 80 folks together for a
meeting. They were very interested to be another branch of the user groups
that will form. And they have their own CAB member local to them!<wink>
I don't think anyone could have made a bad decision with any of the nominees.
I feel that both Al Hopper and Rich Teer are active community folks that have
been around Solaris for a long long time. I feel they will be excellent
members of the CAB.
Alan DuBoff
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 01:51:44 -0800
From: Ben Rockwood <benr@cuddletech.com>
To: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@sun.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Alan DuBoff wrote:
>On Wednesday 02 March 2005 08:46 pm, Bruce Riddle wrote:
>
>>Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:46:02AM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote:
>>>
>>>>Agreed. This pilot is made up of people who were added almost
>>>>one-by-one and people who really wanted to be involved, and of the more
>>>>than 90 people able to vote less than half did. If we can't keep the
>>>>interest of pilot members now we'll see the same thing in bigger numbers
>>>>later.
>>>>
>>>>Does anyone have suggestions as to how we can increase involvement now?
>>>>Does anyone have thoughts on why we might have had such a low turn out?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>While I agree that the turnout was a bit disappointing, I think we
>>>need to keep a few mitigating factors in mind.
>>>
>>>
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solarisx86/polls
>>
>>Check out the voting results of several hundred members.
>>On the yahoo group.
>>Without verifying the numbers it's < 5% participation.
>>
>>perhaps the topics aren't as important but low participation,
>>is not abnormal.
>>
>>
>
>I have to disagree with both of you. I was actually a bit disappointed that
>there wasn't a larger turnout of voters myself. It is only an email to send
>afterall. I can't believe that every person that is in the pilot couldn't
>have voted.
>
>Yahoogroups has long been very poor at poll participation, and that is more to
>do with various aspects of it, one being how it's done on the yahoo site
>interface with a login.
>
>I would encourage all the people on the OpenSolaris pilot to participate, and
>to be more vocal on what you would like to see. This is how you can get
>points across to the CAB, as it is completed. Sun still needs to appoint
>their seats on the CAB, I realize, but that will happen soon I hope since the
>announcement is coming in early April.
>
>I think 39 voters represents the amount of active people on the
>opensolaris-discuss list, plus some extra, but it doesn't represent the
>majority of people in the pilot program to date.
>
>I guess what I'm getting at here is that I would like to see more people from
>the pilot program to participate in general, not just to vote, but to express
>your thoughts and opinions so that the Community and Sun as a whole can work
>together to sort some of the issues and/or concerns that everyone has.
>
>
Exactly Alan! In any open source project of any size you have several
subsets of people, especially on the mailing lists: those who are
active, those who want to be active, those just watching, those who had
a single issue and never left the list, those who are lurkers, etc.
When votes or such happen in these types of projects or groups obviously
the active group are the ones that react, the rest either want to and
don't or simply don't see or care about the issue. Thats normal, thats
life. The pilot is, I think, a diffrent experience because those of us
here wanted to be here and went through the hoops to be here. If we have
uninterested persons in the pilot already we simply should use this
oppertunity to determine why and try to correct the issue while we're
still a small isolated subset of the larger community. Its going to be
easier to learn from this now than it will be post release.
That being said, Alan, you make an interesting point. Perhaps some of
us need to take on more responsability now rather than later. The
project is moving, imho, really really slowly. Code releases are slow
coming (in interval) and there is a lot of disconnect between work
inside and work outside. Perhaps this isn't a problem that we should
expect the internal staff to fix. To put it another way, I and several
others are doing the bare minimum I think and we're waiting for
something to get us involved more deeply and perhaps we need to just
take up the reigns ourselves and start running.
In order to facilitate this, I think I'll jump into the GCC porting
project, even though I don't personally believe in it, to get something
done rather than wait. Also, I should recommit myself to working on my
growing docset, for better or worse, to at least provide something that
might be an improvement over what we have, or a suppliment if nothing
else. At least in this way I'll be driving things forward rather than
waiting for someone to push or draw me out.
I would encourage all the rest of you guys in the pilot to use any
skills that you might have to do the same thing. At this point even
trivial additions or tasks will reveal details that we should consider
moving forward which will help us all plot a course to travel and give
direction to the CAB. I've waited and waited for the CAB to point us in
a direction, but really they are just supposed to solidify the community
direction, not define it. Time to help blaze trails.
benr.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 02:43:53 -0800
From: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Reply-To: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com>
Organization: Solaris x86 Engineering
To: Ben Rockwood <benr@cuddletech.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thursday 03 March 2005 01:51 am, Ben Rockwood wrote:
> Exactly Alan! In any open source project of any size you have several
> subsets of people, especially on the mailing lists: those who are
> active, those who want to be active, those just watching, those who had
> a single issue and never left the list, those who are lurkers, etc.
> When votes or such happen in these types of projects or groups obviously
> the active group are the ones that react, the rest either want to and
> don't or simply don't see or care about the issue. Thats normal, thats
> life. The pilot is, I think, a diffrent experience because those of us
> here wanted to be here and went through the hoops to be here. If we have
> uninterested persons in the pilot already we simply should use this
> oppertunity to determine why and try to correct the issue while we're
> still a small isolated subset of the larger community. Its going to be
> easier to learn from this now than it will be post release.
Yes, everyone on the pilot has signed an NDA and has gone out of their way to
get here. This is exactly why I would have expected better results, just as
you. I don't buy the some of the excuses and/or the fact that we only have a
subset participating today. I would like to see more in the pilot
participate, as I pointed out. But we can't force them.
Please, everyone, feel free to post. Break the ice, and introduce yourself. We
won't bite your head off, and everyone from the various countries is more
than welcome here, so don't let global issues hold you back.
> That being said, Alan, you make an interesting point. Perhaps some of
> us need to take on more responsability now rather than later.
Yes, maybe so. But first I think it would be a good step if folks would just
participate and offer some input. We're going to be going live in April, so
that is around the corner, and I'm plan to emphasize my efforts to the
OpenSolaris site. I've had enough of a few people in the community that
continue to split @$$#O!E hairs about what Sun is doing, or how they're doing
it. This is truely a time for Sun and the Community to work together and
start to collaborate.
> In order to facilitate this, I think I'll jump into the GCC porting
> project, even though I don't personally believe in it, to get something
> done rather than wait.
Please don't forget, I am planning to utilize you with the user group that I
will form in Santa Clara. I'm shooting for the last Tues. of each month, and
trying to lock in the last Tuesday in April at this time. I'm not certain how
this will come to life, but am still working some issues on the Sun side to
get things setup.
This shouldn't stop you from doing work on the gcc stuff, please feel free to
go ahead and do that.
> Also, I should recommit myself to working on my
> growing docset, for better or worse, to at least provide something that
> might be an improvement over what we have, or a suppliment if nothing
> else. At least in this way I'll be driving things forward rather than
> waiting for someone to push or draw me out.
This is an area that can always use more. It would be nice to turn Al Hopper's
notes into some type of FAQ and/or create a FAQ on building the sources.
There's also a ton of information in what John Beck posted, and there's been a
lot of thought from various engineers who gave input into that.
> I would encourage all the rest of you guys in the pilot to use any
> skills that you might have to do the same thing. At this point even
> trivial additions or tasks will reveal details that we should consider
> moving forward which will help us all plot a course to travel and give
> direction to the CAB. I've waited and waited for the CAB to point us in
> a direction, but really they are just supposed to solidify the community
> direction, not define it. Time to help blaze trails.
Yes, the job of the CAB should be to organize and decide the proper direction
for the project and to guide the community/Sun to the best possible future
that can be advised. Of course we need a complete CAB to start that, but they
will need to get input and/or ideas from the members of the project, not just
themself
Alan DuBoff
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:15:56 +0000
From: Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk>
To: Ben Rockwood <benr@cuddletech.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Ben,
> The pilot is, I think, a diffrent experience because those of us
> here wanted to be here and went through the hoops to be here. If we have
> uninterested persons in the pilot already we simply should use this
> oppertunity to determine why and try to correct the issue while we're
> still a small isolated subset of the larger community. Its going to be
> easier to learn from this now than it will be post release.
Agreed completely, except for the fact that if we have
uninterested people here at this point, they should be
reminded that all they have to do is to send a one-liner to
Jim to opt out. We certainly should be used for example to
beat to death any evolving infrastructure that Sun needs to
put in place to support the public release (website
extensions, docs/runbooks, SDLC) and have enough
feedback-loop time to get it as close as possible.
> That being said, Alan, you make an interesting point. Perhaps some of
> us need to take on more responsability now rather than later. The
> project is moving, imho, really really slowly. Code releases are slow
> coming (in interval) and there is a lot of disconnect between work
> inside and work outside. Perhaps this isn't a problem that we should
> expect the internal staff to fix. To put it another way, I and several
> others are doing the bare minimum I think and we're waiting for
> something to get us involved more deeply and perhaps we need to just
> take up the reigns ourselves and start running.
Slowness of progress (eg. between code releases) was
something that was confusing me also. I think that we need
to be "let loose" on some of the stuff from other
consolidations outside ON that eventually will become open.
e.g. If Sun intends to ever open ZFS, it could be some
interesting to mollify rants like "Where's my ZFS?!?" with
press saying "The OpenSolaris Pilot Community is already
working with ZFS source code". Dunno - just musing...
> In order to facilitate this, I think I'll jump into the GCC porting
> project, even though I don't personally believe in it, to get something
> done rather than wait. Also, I should recommit myself to working on my
> growing docset, for better or worse, to at least provide something that
> might be an improvement over what we have, or a suppliment if nothing
> else. At least in this way I'll be driving things forward rather than
> waiting for someone to push or draw me out.
You can never have too many docs ;-) Please keep publishing
them to us for perusal/comment. I think that Sun should give
us a list of "to-be-opened" projects (outside closed-bins)
that may be already underway internally, but which could
benefit from us bashing away at also. We are under NDA, so
confidentiality is not an issue. And none of us would be at
all perturbed if something goes completely pear-shaped -
these are evolving times for us all.
> I would encourage all the rest of you guys in the pilot to use any
> skills that you might have to do the same thing. At this point even
> trivial additions or tasks will reveal details that we should consider
> moving forward which will help us all plot a course to travel and give
> direction to the CAB. I've waited and waited for the CAB to point us in
> a direction, but really they are just supposed to solidify the community
> direction, not define it. Time to help blaze trails.
Agreed again. Once we go fully open, the new community will
naturally become amorphous, and the influence of the CAB
will only be relevant to those who wish to be part of a
"core" community. The hackers and crackers of the world will
naturally go their own devious ways...
BTW: Do you think that the Pilot Members (obv. not CAB) will
have a further role once we embrace the global community
(and the global community subsumes us)? I have heard talk of
"future pilots", but its a tad early to speculate what these
may be (unless anyone proffers suggestions...)
Sean.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 03:55:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Max Bruning <max@bruningsystems.com>
Reply-To: max@bruningsystems.com
To: Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I'm not sure what the complaint is about "slowness of progress
(eg. between code releases)". I haven't finished reading the
30000+ files yet, so I don't mind waiting for more. Or
are you impatient for the encumbered stuff to be released?
(That would be me).
Or, do you think that 1000's of lines of code are being
modified on a weekly basis and we're not seeing them?
Or, like in the need to be able to "build a kernel",
do I just not get it? Building a kernel isn't very
important as long as I can write and build kernel modules,
and seeing every change as its being made isn't that
important to me either.
max
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:40:25 +0100
From: Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, Alan.DuBoff@sun.com
Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com> wrote:
> I have to disagree with both of you. I was actually a bit disappointed that
> there wasn't a larger turnout of voters myself. It is only an email to send
> afterall. I can't believe that every person that is in the pilot couldn't
> have voted.
So you concur to my impression: We are on a list of "higly interested" pilot
members and on such a list, there should be a larger percentage of voters.
Jörg
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 16:15:49 +0000 (GMT)
From: Peter C. Tribble <ptribble@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Peter C. Tribble <ptribble@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk>
To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Max Bruning said:
>>>I'm not sure what the complaint is about "slowness of progress
>>>(eg. between code releases)". I haven't finished reading the
>>>30000+ files yet, so I don't mind waiting for more.
I think what I would like to see is other consolidations brought
into OpenSolaris quickly. In my case, particularly admin/install,
but I'm sure others have other favourites. And I would rather see
that started now rather than waiting until ON is done and dusted.
Peter Tribble
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:47:09 +0100
From: Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
To: sks@cvok.co.uk, benr@cuddletech.com
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk> wrote:
> Slowness of progress (eg. between code releases) was
> something that was confusing me also. I think that we need
> to be "let loose" on some of the stuff from other
> consolidations outside ON that eventually will become open.
> e.g. If Sun intends to ever open ZFS, it could be some
> interesting to mollify rants like "Where's my ZFS?!?" with
> press saying "The OpenSolaris Pilot Community is already
> working with ZFS source code". Dunno - just musing...
Working on my OpenSolaris distribution makes me wondering if we would
see ZFS at all (before the public lounch). Guessing from the fact that
Jeff Bonwick did propose me a copy last year and he does not answer
to e-mail I am guessing that he is very busy and has srious problems
with zfs.
> You can never have too many docs ;-) Please keep publishing
> them to us for perusal/comment. I think that Sun should give
> us a list of "to-be-opened" projects (outside closed-bins)
and a rought time frame (e.g. end of this year).
> that may be already underway internally, but which could
> benefit from us bashing away at also. We are under NDA, so
> confidentiality is not an issue. And none of us would be at
> all perturbed if something goes completely pear-shaped -
> these are evolving times for us all.
I suggest to check the reason why we have the Pilot and to keep
it longer than to the first public Opensolaris release. A groups of
people under NDA could help a lot in case there is still code waiting
to become OSS.
> Agreed again. Once we go fully open, the new community will
> naturally become amorphous, and the influence of the CAB
> will only be relevant to those who wish to be part of a
> "core" community. The hackers and crackers of the world will
> naturally go their own devious ways...
O thought that the main reason for the Pilot is to collect these
core community.
Jörg
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] other consolidations was: CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:49:26 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Hopper <al@logical-approach.com>
To: Peter C. Tribble <ptribble@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Peter C. Tribble wrote:
> Max Bruning said:
>
> >>>I'm not sure what the complaint is about "slowness of progress
> >>>(eg. between code releases)". I haven't finished reading the
> >>>30000+ files yet, so I don't mind waiting for more.
>
> I think what I would like to see is other consolidations brought
> into OpenSolaris quickly. In my case, particularly admin/install,
> but I'm sure others have other favourites. And I would rather see
> that started now rather than waiting until ON is done and dusted.
I think there would be real value to bringing in the new admin/install
codebase sooner, rather than later. I know, right now, it would probably
be very disruptive to the project team and we may have to wait.
The admin/install is the weakest area of Solaris IMHO - and it's
unfortunate that it's the first thing that a potential new Solaris user
encounters. Talk about creating initial impressions! The current Solaris
install experience pales in comparison to other opensource Operating
systems.
Again I know that this code is in good hands and the timing may not be
right. But if the OpenSolaris community gets a look at this code even in
beta form, I think we could help forge a better product. Certainly the
permutations and combinations of target systems hardware and users ideas of
the "perfect"[1] installation are enormous and are difficult for the
developers to anticipate. So extensive testing by the community would be a
big win.
This is probably an area for the CAB to get involved with - identifying
other Consolidations that would be beneficial to Open Solaris (and
commercial Solaris) and prioritizing their introduction order based on
community preferences and the potential gains to Sun.
[1] I notice an increased interest in multi-booting configs based on the
number of related postings to the Solaris x86 list. There is also renewed
interest in emulated MS environments - probably largely facilitated by the
increasingly powerfull commodity hardware available .. including the
current generation of well endowed laptops.
Al Hopper
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:11:49 -0800
From: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@sun.com>
Reply-To: Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@sun.com>
Organization: Solaris x86 Engineering
To: Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>, opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thursday 03 March 2005 06:40 am, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Alan DuBoff <Alan.DuBoff@Sun.Com> wrote:
> > I have to disagree with both of you. I was actually a bit disappointed
> > that there wasn't a larger turnout of voters myself. It is only an email
> > to send afterall. I can't believe that every person that is in the pilot
> > couldn't have voted.
>
> So you concur to my impression: We are on a list of "higly interested"
> pilot members and on such a list, there should be a larger percentage of
> voters.
Yes, but was thinking of Ben's message that posted something to the like...
I'm in both of your camps...
Alan DuBoff
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 12:24:03 -0800
From: Keith M Wesolowski <keith.wesolowski@sun.com>
To: Sean Sprague <sks@cvok.co.uk>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 11:15:56AM +0000, Sean Sprague wrote:
> Jim to opt out. We certainly should be used for example to
> beat to death any evolving infrastructure that Sun needs to
> put in place to support the public release (website
> extensions, docs/runbooks, SDLC) and have enough
> feedback-loop time to get it as close as possible.
So, perhaps I can provide a little additional information here.
The documentation we've prepared has been released for comment
already. I have several action items on my list, at lower priority
than the gcc work, to compile and vet some additional internal
documentation, including ARC cases and perhaps some of the gate
documentation. Yesterday I asked Danek, or onnv gatekeeper, to let me
know of any information he feels is particularly important. Ben has
provided me some additional information to include based on his
experiences, and Al has provided some notes on his build process. If
anyone else has anything to offer, I'm happy to take the changes. A few ideas on what would be useful:
- Convert it to DocBook. I believe Ben mentioned he was working on
this at one point.
- Translate some or all of it into another language. If you want to
do this, please talk with me first so we can agree on the parts least
likely to change (and thus invalidate your work).
- Suggest other introductory microprojects.
- Correct any errors.
- Improve the condensed getting started section to reflect your
experiences. The material in Mike's Release Notes may be helpful here
also.
The web site work is ongoing; the last I heard, we're hoping to have
something to offer you on March 14. This date may change, so please
don't take it to be a promise. One of the features will be a
dramatically better source browser, but the overall list of new
features will be lengthy and very substantive. Derek could perhaps
tell you more about this.
I know of no testing involving the SDLC or other download mechanisms,
but if we do have something, we'll be sure to give it to you as soon
as we're allowed to.
We have the pending gcc project, on which I will provide some updated
status later today.
> Slowness of progress (eg. between code releases) was
> something that was confusing me also. I think that we need
> to be "let loose" on some of the stuff from other
> consolidations outside ON that eventually will become open.
> e.g. If Sun intends to ever open ZFS, it could be some
> interesting to mollify rants like "Where's my ZFS?!?" with
> press saying "The OpenSolaris Pilot Community is already
> working with ZFS source code". Dunno - just musing...
The build 9 code was released yesterday on the site, although CVSweb
hasn't been updated yet. The build schedule is biweekly, but
occasionally testing concerns or problems can delay availability or
even cancel a build. We know that in the long run, this frequency
needs to increase, but this will require some infrastructure we don't
have right now. There's another opportunity for the pilot members to
assist us in developing this infrastructure, which I'll discuss
separately in a later message.
As for project gate availability, I agree that it's desirable but in
the near term we don't have the infrastructure to support it. Once
all the changes associated with encumbered code are integrated into
onnv and the project gates are merged up, it will become easier to
manage this. We also know that web infrastructure to support projects
(both Sun and community led) is a priority, but it will not be
available at launch.
> You can never have too many docs ;-) Please keep publishing
> them to us for perusal/comment. I think that Sun should give
> us a list of "to-be-opened" projects (outside closed-bins)
> that may be already underway internally, but which could
> benefit from us bashing away at also. We are under NDA, so
> confidentiality is not an issue. And none of us would be at
> all perturbed if something goes completely pear-shaped -
> these are evolving times for us all.
At the moment we have not begun the necessary copyright analysis on
anything other than ON. This includes to-be-integrated project code
and non-ON consolidations. I have an action item to create the
necessary infrastructure to analyze the ON-related man pages, SCCS,
and TeamWare, but we are neither committing to making these open
source nor offering any conjecture as to when that could happen.
Unfortunately the nature of this work is such that there is no way for
anyone to assist us.
Keith
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Opensolaris-discuss] other consolidations was: CAB Election Results
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 12:30:08 -0800
From: Keith M Wesolowski <keith.wesolowski@sun.com>
To: Al Hopper <al@logical-approach.com>
CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 11:49:26AM -0600, Al Hopper wrote:
> I think there would be real value to bringing in the new admin/install
> codebase sooner, rather than later. I know, right now, it would probably
> be very disruptive to the project team and we may have to wait.
Absolutely, Al. We'd like to get the install gate especially into
your hands as soon as humanly possible. As you suggest, we are
resource-limited. The priority of the install analysis has increased
due to the input from you and others, but the top priority is still to
make a buildable, working ON consolidation available at launch, and
all our effort is concentrated on tasks critical to that deliverable.
> This is probably an area for the CAB to get involved with - identifying
> other Consolidations that would be beneficial to Open Solaris (and
> commercial Solaris) and prioritizing their introduction order based on
> community preferences and the potential gains to Sun.
Certainly we're interested in knowing what people feel is most
important. At the moment, the highest non-ON priorities are
associated with Install and tools (specifically SCCS). Your continued
input and that of the CAB will be helpful as we reprioritize our work.
> [1] I notice an increased interest in multi-booting configs based on the
> number of related postings to the Solaris x86 list. There is also renewed
Of course the new boot project will greatly improve the user
experience in both single- and multi-boot configurations.
Keith