[illumos-Developer] Closed-bin accords of the OpenSolaris conference... / was: Re: illumos_145 i386 build status

[Garrett D'Amore]

Let's take it case by case until we have a council in place.  I have identified two appointees so far, but I've not had time to coordinate the council further.  I've simply been too busy, as you may imagine.

ken mays <maybird1776 at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>--- On Sun, 8/8/10, Jasse Jansson <jasse at yberwaffe.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Jasse Jansson <jasse at yberwaffe.com>
>> Subject: Re: [illumos-Developer] Closed-bin accords of the OpenSolaris conference... / was: Re: illumos_145 i386 build status
>> To: developer at lists.illumos.org
>> Date: Sunday, August 8, 2010, 6:59 AM
>> On 08/ 8/10 09:41 AM, Garrett D'Amore
>> wrote:
>> > The goals of the project were clear, and I don't think
>> its wise to let either star or ksh93 hijack it for their own
>> purposes.  I see a failure to reach consensus, and we
>> need an implementation now.  So yes, I will make a
>> decision when a group decision cannot be arrived at. 
>> My goal is the good of the project.
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> Don't let politics get in the way of this project.
>
>True. As noted, FreeBSD sed is POSIX:2004 compliant and 'ready' (i.e. non-ALPHA and tested).
>
>Could this be a criteria we use moving forward:
>1. Meets POSIX:2004 compliance
>2. Does not break 'major' compatibility to Oracle's Solaris Next Dev.
>3. Based on proven 'in the field' usage and acceptance. 
>4. Non alpha code - if possible.
>5. Open sourced and meets license requirements
>
>This way, it is not a political choice, biased opinion, or 'dictatorship' ruling but based on meeting the criteria put in place by the group (or high council/architectural committee). Also, the debate becomes about meeting the criteria, not the toolsets.
>
>~ Ken Mays
>
>
>      
>
>_______________________________________________
>Developer mailing list
>Developer at lists.illumos.org
>http://lists.illumos.org/m/listinfo/developer
>