| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On 1/6/06, Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> Absolutely true. That said, there's relatively little resistance to the |
| 5 |
> concept of Enterprise Gentoo, as far as I know. There is substantial |
| 6 |
> resistance to anything that might add additional work to |
| 7 |
> already-overwhelmed package maintainers, however, and I believe that |
| 8 |
> the lack of an acceptable solution there is what stalled things the last |
| 9 |
> time around. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I can only speak for myself, but I believe that the "enterprise" |
| 12 |
project hasn't discovered either a winning strategy or a sustainable |
| 13 |
one so far. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'd like to see the "Enterprise" project put forward a clear value |
| 16 |
proposition, and clearly demonstrate both how it will deliver that |
| 17 |
value and how it will sustain the offering. I'd like to see it |
| 18 |
identify all of the required enablers, and how they will be delivered. |
| 19 |
I'd like to see it demonstrate an understanding of where this work |
| 20 |
will fit well with what already happens in Gentoo, and where this work |
| 21 |
is at odds with the existing Gentoo project. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
These are all questions that I don't think GLEP 19 adequately |
| 24 |
addresses as I read it today. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I guess that I'm asking for something that would fall somewhere |
| 27 |
between a funding pitch and a full-blown business plan. At the very |
| 28 |
least, something that you could reasonably preset to a company board. |
| 29 |
What I feel I've been seeing so far is low-level technical planning, |
| 30 |
and most of the discussion seems to be focused only at this level. (I |
| 31 |
know I'm not going to get it, but what's the harm in asking? :) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Although I admit to having concerns about whether this project can be |
| 34 |
delivered by a volunteer workforce - and this workforce in particular |
| 35 |
- I can't form a strong position on this, because I don't really |
| 36 |
understand what this project is trying to achieve yet. I can't help |
| 37 |
but feel that what we've got at the moment is a solution-driven |
| 38 |
project, instead of one that's benefit-driven. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
An "enterprise" offering worthy of the name is to make a promise that |
| 41 |
goes a long way beyond what Gentoo offers today (although, alas, |
| 42 |
nowhere near as far as I wish the term "enterprise" meant). Mark |
| 43 |
Shuttleworth can guarantee that promise for Ubuntu from the loose |
| 44 |
change in his pockets. How are we doing to guarantee that promise? |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
And if we're not, could we stop using the "enterprise" word in |
| 47 |
relation to this project, to ensure that casual observers don't get |
| 48 |
the wrong idea? :) |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Best regards, |
| 51 |
Stu |
| 52 |
-- |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
-- |
| 55 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives