Comments on: Why Our Governance Doesn’t Work

By: Stephen Hahn

Stephen Hahn — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:16:03 +0000

@gman: Yes, I would probably still pursue project approval via Consensus, but would be a super-nagger among my core contributors. But, if Consensus is too hard, Assumed could be used instead. We could revise the policy to make this more clear.

@Peter: Which proposal is stuck? (I’ll reiterate my point on nagging, but if it’s in a group I vote in, I’ll help you nag.)

By: mc

mc — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:08:57 +0000

> Every day I come across examples of why the OpenSolaris governance is really proving to be an obstacle with zero value return.

I’m pretty sure this is what Palpatine said before he overthrew the Galactic Senate and took over the galaxy.

But I agree though, the impotent and useless OpenSolaris community as it is should be discarded and reformed under the total and explicit governance of Sun Microsystems.

By: gman

gman — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:44:05 +0000

Stephen: Aww, you mean I have to follow up a rant with a proposal? I know it’s very easy to jump into criticizing the constitution, but I can’t get away from the feeling that this should be easier. It’s entirely possible that Jim shouldn’t be using the Consensus voting method, despite the Constitution currently suggesting it. Projects should be zero cost, in my opinion – even the worst run, least successful project is going to allow those leading it to make enough mistakes to learn from their experiences. While there’s obvious cost from a corporate point of view in terms of man months, it’s not clear what costs there are within an open source point of view.

By: Peter Tribble

Peter Tribble — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:32:05 +0000

Amen to that. I have a project proposal from Jan 20 that still hasn’t managed to qualify.

Interestingly, as the constitution doesn’t really define projects I think we’re overinterpreting the constitutional requirements and could just change the Project Instantiation Policy to make it much much easier.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 06:29:31 +0000

So, since the title suggests ignoring the specifics of the discussion so far, what do you propose to change about the policy or the constitution?