Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Ian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Re: Context See: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=168840 And see the many threads on many different lists/forums about the naming issue. My understanding of the OpenSolaris constitution, community, and OGB is that the OGB appoints members of the community (core contributers) to have the power to vote on issues that concern the community. The naming issue obviously concerns some members of the community. So I figured I'd see some voting happen before decisions were made. I became especially concerned about the integrity of the OpenSolaris bureaucracy when I read this part of Mr. Murdock's statement: Again, I have no doubt this will be controversial. However, it is the right thing to do for the community I became concerned because I thought it wasn't his call to decide what is right for the community. I hope that clarifies my previous post for you! This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
PS: Followups set to trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris dot org . Web users following this discussion on jive cannot participate if the discussion is not on jive. So I suggest you continue it out in the open on the public general discuss or indiana lists/forums. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] eclipse-SDK-3.3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip
Dear All, please find the file http://compass.com.hk/eclipse-SDK-3.3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip for your opensolaris/x86 distributions. it's just not on download.eclipse.org. it requires jdk1.6.0, as every europa distribution does. Enjoy, Clarence CHU [EMAIL PROTECTED] Data Expert Limited This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Where's the pointer to formal buy-in by the OGB for the use of Indiana as _the_ OpenSolaris reference distro? Where's at least a broad _agreement_ between Sun and the OGB that a program will be developed to (a) define what constitutes a compatible distro, and (b) allow compatible distros to use the OpenSolaris trademark? Possibly not necessary to have, but certainly polite and credibility-enhancing, IMO. Heck, I'm not even crazy about the idea of a _reference_ distro; makes the distro itself the definition of compatibility, which is ugly. I like the idea of a _spec_ that's the reference, along with a primary _sample_ distro, and equal footing for anybody that meets the spec. Kind of like (to go way back) distinguishing between the SVID and the System V code base. Well, why not write an OpenSolaris reference addendum to SUSv3 that (a) includes presumably already permitted deviations, and (b) defines anything else needed to constitute a compatible distro, including references to SPARC and x86 ABI docs, etc? Some notes as to divergences (such as packaging) between same and comparable build SXCE might also be in order, I think. Anything less than starting with a spec (rather than a codebase) is amateurish, I think. Besides, unless that sort of rigorous documentation evolves alongside, it tends not to get done, at least to the point it ought to be, namely where (if one made no mistakes) one could write code, makefiles, packaging scripts, etc, offline on another sort of system, copy them over, type one command on the target system, and have it all work, simply by following the spec and referenced docs; and further, where said packages would (modulo library versioning and such) be ABI compatible across distros on the build platform. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] b75 is a desaster
I had ufsrestore 17 nodes to b74. the gdm/xdmcp doesn't work at all! Best wishes, Clarence CHU This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] eclipse-SDK-3.3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip
Hey man, you're my hero! -- Georg. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
PS: Followups set to trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris dot org . Web users following this discussion on jive cannot participate if the discussion is not on jive. So I suggest you continue it out in the open on the public general discuss or indiana lists/forums. Thank you - not having an accessible-from-anywhere email solution suitable for high volume, with threaded access and auto-filing, I for one usually do use jive, even if it's got problems of its own. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
PS: Followups set to trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris dot org . Web users following this discussion on jive cannot participate if the discussion is not on jive. So I suggest you continue it out in the open on the public general discuss or indiana lists/forums. Thank you - not having an accessible-from-anywhere email solution suitable for high volume, with threaded access and auto-filing, I for one usually do use jive, even if it's got problems of its own. Of course, if the forums/mailing lists were also accessible via a non-Usenet (so as to allow for authentication to be defined as desired) NNTP server, that would certainly be my first choice, since newsreaders tend to be designed to handle seriously high volume, killfiles, etc. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] eclipse-SDK-3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip
Do try building europa on any reference/supported platform w/o jdk1.6.0+ there's -targe = 1.6 in the build.xml. It had kiiled my last weekend for the port/packaging/testing. If one need jdk1.4+ to run eclipse, i had eclipse-SDK-3.2.2-solaris-gtk-x86.zip ported 7-monthes ago on solaris 10/x86 11/06. Best wishes, Clarence CHU This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] eclipse-SDK-3.3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip
Hmm, after my initial bliss settled for a second I come to realize you said it requires JDK 1.6 as every Europa distribution does. I can't remember that Europa requires JDK 1.6. Eclipse itself requires JDK 1.5 per the README, and I haven't seen any additional requirements for any plugin. Are you sure about this dependency? Not that JDK 1.6 would be a problem for me. -- Regards, Georg. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] eclipse-SDK-3.3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip
Il Wednesday 31 October 2007 09:18:56 Clarence CHU ha scritto: Dear All, please find the file http://compass.com.hk/eclipse-SDK-3.3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip for your opensolaris/x86 distributions. it's just not on download.eclipse.org. it requires jdk1.6.0, as every europa distribution does. great, thanks. I wonder why the core eclipse doesn't contain the necessary changes to the build system; are you going to submit them a patch? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
MC wrote: PS: Followups set to trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris dot org . Web users following this discussion on jive cannot participate if the discussion is not on jive. So I suggest you continue it out in the open on the public general discuss or indiana lists/forums. trademark-policy-dev is a public list as well: http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev However, there is no forum for that list, so it's confusing. I apologize. I set up the list but didn't do the forum gateway. We have a bunch of lists that don't have forums now, and many times people (like myself) don't even want the forums since they are such a pain in the butt. Until we dump Jive, we should probably keep forums for the key lists. I'll check with Derek/Eric on this. Jim -- Jim Grisanzio http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
MC wrote: My understanding of the OpenSolaris constitution, community, and OGB is that the OGB appoints members of the community (core contributers) to have the power to vote on issues that concern the community. The naming issue obviously concerns some members of the community. So I figured I'd see some voting happen before decisions were made. +1 - there should have been a vote. -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
Quoting Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I tried another way to pass 2 y replies: rm -f /tmp/yes.txt touch /tmp/yes.txt echo y /tmp/yes.txt echo y /tmp/yes.txt cat /tmp/yes.txt | pkgrm SPROprfnx Also you can try - printf y\ny\n | pkgrm SPROprfnx (echo y; echo y) | pkgrm Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 07:59:35PM +1300, Ian Collins wrote: MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 15:34:05 -0400 From: Ian Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: initial draft 1-pager for Indiana (was Re: [osol-discuss] Sun to make Solaris more Linux like) I guess I don't understand what it is that you want (or don't want) us to do. How are we dominating the community instead of opening itself for the community when we are doing everything in the community openly and inviting anyone to participate alongside us? -ian Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 18:32:31 -0400 From: Ian Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [osol-discuss] Re: Sun to make Solaris more Linux like On 5/22/07, Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The design and planning of this (an OpenSolaris reference distro) _is_ going to be an OpenSolaris Community-governed thing, not a Sun-governed thing, right? Yes. -ian Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 09:50:21 -0400 From: Ian Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Sun to make Solaris more Linux like On 5/10/07, Christopher Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it too much to ask for the community 'behind' the future operating system to be informed of such decisions? Even proposals?? And that's exactly what you're getting--fasten your seat belts! Project Indiana is exactly 10 days old. This is radical transparency, and not without its downside (you have no idea the week I've had..). -ian = Ceri -- That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere pgpITMCPMtv7b.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] eclipse-SDK-3.3.1.1-solaris-gtk-x86.zip
If there is a place of porting eclipse, it is http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-eclipse there's a port/eclipse-devel of Europa for FreeBSD since early Oct, 2007. the patches there are open for all reviews for both i386 and x86_64, too. html redering may be performed by famous browser of builder's choice. If I can make the ports machanism works on solaris, I'll be rich. Best wishes, Clarence CHU This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] partition table, what partition table?
Several week ago I upgraded my desktop from build 49 to build 73. I ran the upgrade and it installed without a problem. Last night I tried a new install from the same build 73 media. The new install format did not give me the chance to lay out the partition on the drive. It did allow me to fdisk problems with this also as it would not let me configure any logical with anything but solaris/other slice up the drive but after that I could fin no way to partition the drive. Am i missing something, besides the partitions for /var /opt and configuring the correct swap amount? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] partition table, what partition table?
On 31/10/2007, Mike DeMarco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several week ago I upgraded my desktop from build 49 to build 73. I ran the upgrade and it installed without a problem. Last night I tried a new install from the same build 73 media. The new install format did not give me the chance to lay out the partition on the drive. It did allow me to fdisk problems with this also as it would not let me configure any logical with anything but solaris/other slice up the drive but after that I could fin no way to partition the drive. Am i missing something, besides the partitions for /var /opt and configuring the correct swap amount? The current installer is a prototype and does not yet support any advanced operations. You don't really need separate partitions for anything except swap and root. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] partition table, what partition table?
On 31/10/2007, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 31/10/2007, Mike DeMarco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several week ago I upgraded my desktop from build 49 to build 73. I ran the upgrade and it installed without a problem. Last night I tried a new install from the same build 73 media. The new install format did not give me the chance to lay out the partition on the drive. It did allow me to fdisk problems with this also as it would not let me configure any logical with anything but solaris/other slice up the drive but after that I could fin no way to partition the drive. Am i missing something, besides the partitions for /var /opt and configuring the correct swap amount? The current installer is a prototype and does not yet support any advanced operations. You don't really need separate partitions for anything except swap and root. Sorry, I should have said *slices*. You only need *one* partition obviously :) -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Solaris Packages
Is there any documentation on how to make packages for Solaris. Example I have compiled a number of programs from source such as tinydns and made service management scripts for them I would like to save them or even share them with others. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
Nikolay Molchanov writes: 12580:read(0, y\n y\n, 4096) = 4 [...] 12585:read(0, 0x080FC1E4, 4096) = 0 Obviously at this moment there is no way to get y from the input file. A suggested fix is to read only one line in /usr/sbin/pkgrm, when it needs an answer on its first question. I think what you're suggesting really isn't feasible. Those are two different processes reading from the same pipe. Pipes, unlike ttys, don't respect line boundaries. Thus, the reader gets all the data he asks for. The line-buffering then occurs inside stdio itself, which will return just one line at a time if that's what the caller requests. When the second independent process comes along, nothing is left to read. To make the behavior work as you're suggesting, either stdio would have to make read(2) calls of a single byte at a time when filling its buffers (which would make everything very slow) or we'd need to add something like ldterm(7M) to pipes. Either way, the result would be strange, likely slow, possibly incompatible with the standards, and very much unlike UNIX. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Packages
Is there any documentation on how to make packages for Solaris. Example I have compiled a number of programs from source such as tinydns and made service management scripts for them I would like to save them or even share them with others. Take a look around the Blastwave.org site. If you are thinking of SVR4 packages anyways. Otherwise .. the new IPS package concept may be of interest to you. Dennis ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Packages
Mark Walmsley wrote: Is there any documentation on how to make packages for Solaris. Example I have compiled a number of programs from source such as tinydns and made service management scripts for them I would like to save them or even share them with others. There is actually. If your type Solaris packages into your favorite search engine, then you will find plenty of information. If you look at the Solaris documentation on docs.sun.com, you will find there is a whole manual in the subject. There also is some build environments http://pkgbuild.sourceforge.net/ around which have build scripts http://pkgbuild.sourceforge.net/spec-files-extra/ and patches for most of the useful Linux applications. If you are lazy and just want the binaries, then you can give blastwave a try. Doug ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Jim Grisanzio wrote: trademark-policy-dev is a public list as well: http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev However, there is no forum for that list, so it's confusing. I apologize. I set up the list but didn't do the forum gateway. We have a bunch of lists that don't have forums now, and many times people (like myself) don't even want the forums since they are such a pain in the butt. Until we dump Jive, we should probably keep forums for the key lists. I'll check with Derek/Eric on this. This should now have a Jive forum. I don't know how to suck in the old archived content in mailman into Jive, but let me know if there are any issues - I'll be monitoring over the next few hours to make sure it's configured ok. Glynn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
MC wrote: My understanding of the OpenSolaris constitution, community, and OGB is that the OGB appoints members of the community (core contributers) to have the power to vote on issues that concern the community. Other way around actually - the community, specifically each Community Group, names people as Core Contributors, who can then vote in community-wide issues, such as picking the OGB members. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] partition table, what partition table?
On 31/10/2007, Mike DeMarco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several week ago I upgraded my desktop from build 49 to build 73. I ran the upgrade and it installed without a problem. Last night I tried a new install from the same build 73 media. The new install format did not give me the chance to lay out the partition on the drive. It did allow me to fdisk problems with this also as it would not let me configure any logical with anything but solaris/other slice up the drive but after that I could fin no way to partition the drive. Am i missing something, besides the partitions for /var /opt and configuring the correct swap amount? The current installer is a prototype and does not yet support any advanced operations. You don't really need separate partitions for anything except swap and root. Problem here is that it configured with 512meg of swap and gave me no way to change that. Also it configured 512meg for /export/home with no way to change. Hope the advanced options are not too far off. For now I have to install older builds and do a upgrade to get the partition table the way I need it. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Problem of setting version entry in ‘depend’ file of package
I am working on creating a package pkg1 that depend on pkg2, so I added a ‘depend’ config file in the prototype. From the man page of depend, I should add the following entries in the depend file: type pkg name (arch)version (arch)version So I added the following entries in the ‘depend’ P pkg2 my_pkg2 I386 1.0 My question is: if I want my pkg1 depends on the pkg2 that version = 1.0, how could I write it in the ‘depend’? Any comments are appreciated, thank you very much. The methods I known: 1. Add all the possible versions in the ‘depend’, like the following: P pkg2 my_pkg2 i386 1.0 i386 2.0 i386 3.0 … 2. Ignore the version entry in the ‘depend’, like the following: P pkg2 my_pkg2 This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Packages
On 31/10/2007, Mark Walmsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any documentation on how to make packages for Solaris. Example I have compiled a number of programs from source such as tinydns and made service management scripts for them I would like to save them or even share them with others. There is extensive documentation on docs.sun.com. You can also cheat and use a version of Philip Brown's gnutopkg script I hacked up here that makes it dead easy to package things that use gnu autotools (ugh) to build: http://icculus.org/~eviltypeguy/pkg/gnutopkg It will ask you all of the questions needed and then create a package for you in the current directory. I would encourage you to read the docs at docs.sun.com, but the tool will help you cheat while you get your feet wet. Plus, you can look at the files it creates to get an idea of what to do yourself. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] partition table, what partition table?
On 31/10/2007, Mike DeMarco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 31/10/2007, Mike DeMarco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several week ago I upgraded my desktop from build 49 to build 73. I ran the upgrade and it installed without a problem. Last night I tried a new install from the same build 73 media. The new install format did not give me the chance to lay out the partition on the drive. It did allow me to fdisk problems with this also as it would not let me configure any logical with anything but solaris/other slice up the drive but after that I could fin no way to partition the drive. Am i missing something, besides the partitions for /var /opt and configuring the correct swap amount? The current installer is a prototype and does not yet support any advanced operations. You don't really need separate partitions for anything except swap and root. Problem here is that it configured with 512meg of swap and gave me no way to change that. Also it configured 512meg for /export/home with no way to change. Hope the advanced options are not too far off. For now I have to install older builds and do a upgrade to get the partition table the way I need it. Actually, you don't. Just choose the Solaris Express option and use the old installer instead of the Solaris Express Developer Edition option. Once you've finished installing, you can run the script to install the developer tools from the DVD. I used the text installer to install snv75 at home without issue. For the installer to have picked such small sizes for your /export/home and swap, you must have very limited disk space. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Richard L. Hamilton wrote: MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Where's the pointer to formal buy-in by the OGB for the use of Indiana as _the_ OpenSolaris reference distro? There was none. The OGB was not formally consulted. Several of us made our concerns known as individual voices, but that apparently had no effect. Where's at least a broad _agreement_ between Sun and the OGB that a program will be developed to (a) define what constitutes a compatible distro, and (b) allow compatible distros to use the OpenSolaris trademark? There is none. Possibly not necessary to have, but certainly polite and credibility-enhancing, IMO. Indeed, it would have been polite, wouldn't it. cheers, steve -- stephen lau | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.whacked.net ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Stephen Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard L. Hamilton wrote: MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Where's the pointer to formal buy-in by the OGB for the use of Indiana as _the_ OpenSolaris reference distro? There was none. The OGB was not formally consulted. Several of us made our concerns known as individual voices, but that apparently had no effect. Where's at least a broad _agreement_ between Sun and the OGB that a program will be developed to (a) define what constitutes a compatible distro, and (b) allow compatible distros to use the OpenSolaris trademark? There is none. Possibly not necessary to have, but certainly polite and credibility-enhancing, IMO. Indeed, it would have been polite, wouldn't it. The important thing to remember here is that no official decision has been made. Instead of a bunch of people running around grumpy, let's take this opportunity to ensure that we participate in the branding and trademark discussion taking place on trademark-policy-dev. Before we have something truly official, the advocacy community (and possibly others) need to propose something to the OGB and then a vote needs to happen. Remember that Sun can use the trademark in whatever way they choose but they don't control the communities here. Instead of acting as if Sun has made any decisions for you, use the abilities given to you by the constitution you voted for. 1) Get involved in the discussion, be a part of the process 2) Get the relevant communities to form a proper proposal that reflects the results of that process 3) Get the core contributors votes for it 4) Propose it to the OGB 5) Have a community vote Really, I don't see the problem here. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
On 10/31/07, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you very much, guys, for giving this example:
% yes | pkgrm ...
It really works! But it is absolutely not understandable why a standard Unix
solution
does not work:
% echo y | echo y | pkgrm ...
The pipe is wrong. You want (sh/ksh/ksh93/bash):
{ echo y ; echo y ; } | pkgrm
Jenny
--
Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
Jennifer Pioch wrote:
On 10/31/07, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you very much, guys, for giving this example:
% yes | pkgrm ...
It really works! But it is absolutely not understandable why a standard Unix
solution
does not work:
% echo y | echo y | pkgrm ...
The pipe is wrong. You want (sh/ksh/ksh93/bash):
{ echo y ; echo y ; } | pkgrm
Unfortunately it does not work anyway. Truss file shows that pkgrm reads
both answers
at once, and then starts a child process, that will ask second question.
Thanks,
Nik
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe we don't have to reconcile them, because they are /different/ things. Which of the following are OpenSolaris? Duh, they all are. They simply have different audiences: The OpenSolaris Operating System: At the minimalist end, we have a miniroot consisting ... Today we have SX, SXDE, Schillix, Belinix, MartUX and Nexenta as examples of various targeted distros. If I have a binary program (say, oracle or my company's accounting package...), and I want to pick a distro, Should I /expect/ my application to just work on it? /Will/ it just work? Does the distro owner have any expectations in this regard? and most importantly, How would I tell? More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe we don't have to reconcile them, because they are /different/ things. Which of the following are OpenSolaris? Duh, they all are. They simply have different audiences: The OpenSolaris Operating System: At the minimalist end, we have a miniroot consisting ... Today we have SX, SXDE, Schillix, Belinix, MartUX and Nexenta as examples of various targeted distros. If I have a binary program (say, oracle or my company's accounting package...), and I want to pick a distro, Should I /expect/ my application to just work on it? /Will/ it just work? Does the distro owner have any expectations in this regard? and most importantly, How would I tell? More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
I'm not suggesting to change stdio, I'm suggesting to change pkgrm code to use read(0, buf, 1); in loop to read 1 byte from standard input until the end of line or EOF happens. Basically it is the same loop as it uses to write its questions: 12580:write(2, D, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 12580:write(2, y, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, u, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 ... In this case it will leave the pointer in the input file at the beginning of next line, so the child process will read from this point. Thanks, Nik This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: MC wrote: My understanding of the OpenSolaris constitution, community, and OGB is that the OGB appoints members of the community (core contributers) to have the power to vote on issues that concern the community. The naming issue obviously concerns some members of the community. So I figured I'd see some voting happen before decisions were made. +1 - there should have been a vote. As Alan Coopersmith just alluded to, it's not up to the OGB to mandate a vote. (Nor is it up to Sun of course); and among those who do have the power -- Community Groups and their Contributors -- there isn't a collective push to put it to a vote. Thus, concedingly, +1 from me too, which I'm declaring simply because I'd like to be on record as among those who dissented -- albeit from what appears to be a very large majority view. Eric ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
On 31/10/2007, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not suggesting to change stdio, I'm suggesting to change pkgrm code to use read(0, buf, 1); in loop to read 1 byte from standard input until the end of line or EOF happens. Basically it is the same loop as it uses to write its questions: 12580:write(2, D, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 12580:write(2, y, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, u, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 ... In this case it will leave the pointer in the input file at the beginning of next line, so the child process will read from this point. That seems like a lot of hackery for little benefit. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
On 10/31/07, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not suggesting to change stdio, I'm suggesting to change pkgrm code to use read(0, buf, 1); in loop to read 1 byte from standard input until the end of line or EOF happens. Basically it is the same loop as it uses to write its questions: 12580:write(2, D, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 12580:write(2, y, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, u, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 ... In this case it will leave the pointer in the input file at the beginning of next line, so the child process will read from this point. Try changing the buffering mode of stdio, either to _IONBF or _IOLBF. Jenny -- Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not suggesting to change stdio, I'm suggesting to change pkgrm code to use read(0, buf, 1); in loop to read 1 byte from standard input until the end of line or EOF happens. Basically it is the same loop as it uses to write its questions: 12580:write(2, D, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 12580:write(2, y, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, u, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 ... In this case it will leave the pointer in the input file at the beginning of next line, so the child process will read from this point. That seems like a lot of hackery for little benefit. The whole thing reads a bit like How do we solve a problem that is ages old and must have been solved before ?. Isn't this exactly what programs like expect were supposed to address / allow - remote-control/script things that request user input, aka read from stdin ? FrankH. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Joerg Schilling wrote: I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris Why would Sun OpenSolaris make sense? Actually, that expression has been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use of the brand? Jim -- http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not suggesting to change stdio, I'm suggesting to change pkgrm code to use read(0, buf, 1); in loop to read 1 byte from standard input until the end of line or EOF happens. Basically it is the same loop as it uses to write its questions: 12580:write(2, D, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 12580:write(2, y, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, o, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, u, 1)= 1 12580:write(2, , 1)= 1 ... In this case it will leave the pointer in the input file at the beginning of next line, so the child process will read from this point. That seems like a lot of hackery for little benefit. There is no hackery. What do you mean hackery, reading one byte? Why writing one byte is not a hackery? And the benefits for the users are obvious: the existing behavior is buggy and simply unusable in non-interactive mode, because it misses the replies. If all replies are y, command /bin/yes can solve this problem. If some replies should be n - there is no solution. Thanks, Nik ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. How about trying to prove that there is no such harm? It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Hello, I think the question of getting access to OpenSolaris could be addressed by allowing (anyone interested in doing so) to make that decision by looking at a matrix with requirements (horizontally), and how various distro's satisfy those requirements (vertically). Assuming each of the distros were using Nevada as the kernel (which is available through the OpenSolaris project, and which they do), then all distro's deserve to be referenced as OpenSolaris-based, even if such distro's come from Sun. Similar, in some ways, to the Intel-inside marketing of the mid-90's. Its based on OpenSolaris (as an adjective), but it could only be THE (noun) OpenSolaris distribution if it would clearly define the delta's/features that it has compared with: 1) other distro's and 2) how it fits into and benefits the overall OpenSolaris (adjective) project. Perhaps overly simplified, but I often feel we need to keep things simple. My $0.02. Regards, Isaac Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe we don't have to reconcile them, because they are /different/ things. Which of the following are OpenSolaris? Duh, they all are. They simply have different audiences: The OpenSolaris Operating System: At the minimalist end, we have a miniroot consisting ... Today we have SX, SXDE, Schillix, Belinix, MartUX and Nexenta as examples of various targeted distros. If I have a binary program (say, oracle or my company's accounting package...), and I want to pick a distro, Should I /expect/ my application to just work on it? /Will/ it just work? Does the distro owner have any expectations in this regard? and most importantly, How would I tell? More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. How about trying to prove that there is no such harm? That's my point. If you want to be able to prove *why* we shouldn't have a distribution called OpenSolaris you must demonstrate the harm it would cause as the benefit has already been demonstrated and talked about. Not to be offensive, but other than hurt feelings, I don't see the harm in it. It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. I don't believe that for a moment. Going to ubuntu.com only lets me download Ubuntu easily; but there are links that go off to other places where you can get Kubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. Many people do know that other flavours of Ubuntu exist. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Remember that Sun can use the trademark in whatever way they choose but they don't control the communities here. Instead of acting as if Sun has made any decisions for you, use the abilities given to you by the constitution you voted for. I remember that we did aggree ~ 2.5 years ago, that Sun would not call a distro OpenSolaris. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] partition table, what partition table?
On 31/10/2007, Mike DeMarco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 31/10/2007, Mike DeMarco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several week ago I upgraded my desktop from build 49 to build 73. I ran the upgrade and it installed without a problem. Last night I tried a new install from the same build 73 media. The new install format did not give me the chance to lay out the partition on the drive. It did allow me to fdisk problems with this also as it would not let me configure any logical with anything but solaris/other slice up the drive but after that I could fin no way to partition the drive. Am i missing something, besides the partitions for /var /opt and configuring the correct swap amount? The current installer is a prototype and does not yet support any advanced operations. You don't really need separate partitions for anything except swap and root. Problem here is that it configured with 512meg of swap and gave me no way to change that. Also it configured 512meg for /export/home with no way to change. Hope the advanced options are not too far off. For now I have to install older builds and do a upgrade to get the partition table the way I need it. Actually, you don't. Just choose the Solaris Express option and use the old installer instead of the Solaris Express Developer Edition option. Once you've finished installing, you can run the script to install the developer tools from the DVD. I used the text installer to install snv75 at home without issue. For the installer to have picked such small sizes for your /export/home and swap, you must have very limited disk space. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org I limit the disk space for solaris and create a fdisk partition for zfs. This allows me to keep upgrading Solaris without losing all my custom data. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Stephen Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard L. Hamilton wrote: MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Where's the pointer to formal buy-in by the OGB for the use of Indiana as _the_ OpenSolaris reference distro? There was none. The OGB was not formally consulted. Several of us made our concerns known as individual voices, but that apparently had no effect. Where's at least a broad _agreement_ between Sun and the OGB that a program will be developed to (a) define what constitutes a compatible distro, and (b) allow compatible distros to use the OpenSolaris trademark? There is none. Possibly not necessary to have, but certainly polite and credibility-enhancing, IMO. Indeed, it would have been polite, wouldn't it. The important thing to remember here is that no official decision has been made. Instead of a bunch of people running around grumpy, let's take this opportunity to ensure that we participate in the branding and trademark discussion taking place on trademark-policy-dev. Before we have something truly official, the advocacy community (and possibly others) need to propose something to the OGB and then a vote needs to happen. Is this in the charter? What happens if the advocacy community votes and approves it? Personally, I would rather it just happened as it would slightly reduce the world daily total of spam :) Remember that Sun can use the trademark in whatever way they choose but they don't control the communities here. Instead of acting as if Sun has made any decisions for you, use the abilities given to you by the constitution you voted for. 1) Get involved in the discussion, be a part of the process Yes. But keep it short an sweet. The endless debate so far is only going around in circles. Use your last dying breath to add some code :) 2) Get the relevant communities to form a proper proposal that reflects the results of that process Isn't that already happening? 3) Get the core contributors votes for it Yes 'core' from the relevent community i.e. advocacy. 4) Propose it to the OGB Why? It should be proposed to Sun rather than the OGB. They own the trademark. 5) Have a community vote Why? So far I have seen almost zero comments from core contributes from other communities. Is there really interest? Doug ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
On 31/10/2007, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Nikolay Molchanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not suggesting to change stdio, I'm suggesting to change pkgrm code to use read(0, buf, 1); in loop to read 1 byte from standard input until the end of line or EOF happens. Basically it is the same loop as it uses to write its questions: 12580: write(2, D, 1) = 1 12580: write(2, o, 1) = 1 12580: write(2, , 1) = 1 12580: write(2, y, 1) = 1 12580: write(2, o, 1) = 1 12580: write(2, u, 1) = 1 12580: write(2, , 1) = 1 ... In this case it will leave the pointer in the input file at the beginning of next line, so the child process will read from this point. That seems like a lot of hackery for little benefit. There is no hackery. What do you mean hackery, reading one byte? Why writing one byte is not a hackery? It is hackery because you are placing special behaviour into how input is read from stdin for the sole purpose of supporting a deficiency in the design of the program. I also never support byte-based reads because I think that's a silly hack in a multi-byte world. And the benefits for the users are obvious: the existing behavior is buggy No it is not. It behaves exactly as I would expect it to given that it is separate programs. Not only that, I consider it silly to expect someone to be able to do a yes | package-command. That points to a deficiency in the package command rather than a need to read data in an arbitrary fashion from stdin. and simply unusable in non-interactive mode, because it misses the replies. If all replies are y, command /bin/yes can solve this problem. If some replies should be n - there is no solution. Sorry, I disagree. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Eric Boutilier wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: MC wrote: My understanding of the OpenSolaris constitution, community, and OGB is that the OGB appoints members of the community (core contributers) to have the power to vote on issues that concern the community. The naming issue obviously concerns some members of the community. So I figured I'd see some voting happen before decisions were made. +1 - there should have been a vote. As Alan Coopersmith just alluded to, it's not up to the OGB to mandate a vote. (Nor is it up to Sun of course); and among those who do have the power -- Community Groups and their Contributors -- there isn't a collective push to put it to a vote. Thus, concedingly, +1 from me too, which I'm declaring simply because I'd like to be on record as among those who dissented -- albeit from what appears to be a very large majority view. Oh, make no mistake, by the way, had there /been/ a vote, I would have voted in favor of the name that was just announced. /That/ I'm fine with. Eric ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Doug Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Stephen Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard L. Hamilton wrote: MC wrote: Not that I care for bureaucracy, and not that I know what is happening here, but... I think if you strong-arm past the OpenSolaris community bureaucracy (and again, not saying you are, because I don't know much about it), it'll be archived forever and referenced in the future to show how Sun only takes said OpenSolaris bureaucracy seriously when it is convenient for them. Context? Where's the pointer to formal buy-in by the OGB for the use of Indiana as _the_ OpenSolaris reference distro? There was none. The OGB was not formally consulted. Several of us made our concerns known as individual voices, but that apparently had no effect. Where's at least a broad _agreement_ between Sun and the OGB that a program will be developed to (a) define what constitutes a compatible distro, and (b) allow compatible distros to use the OpenSolaris trademark? There is none. Possibly not necessary to have, but certainly polite and credibility-enhancing, IMO. Indeed, it would have been polite, wouldn't it. The important thing to remember here is that no official decision has been made. Instead of a bunch of people running around grumpy, let's take this opportunity to ensure that we participate in the branding and trademark discussion taking place on trademark-policy-dev. Before we have something truly official, the advocacy community (and possibly others) need to propose something to the OGB and then a vote needs to happen. Is this in the charter? What happens if the advocacy community votes and approves it? I was just picking a relevant community to represent a proposal. Any community could do it, but it would look odd for say, the DTrace community to make a distribution naming proposal :) Personally, I would rather it just happened as it would slightly reduce the world daily total of spam :) No comment ;) Remember that Sun can use the trademark in whatever way they choose but they don't control the communities here. Instead of acting as if Sun has made any decisions for you, use the abilities given to you by the constitution you voted for. 1) Get involved in the discussion, be a part of the process Yes. But keep it short an sweet. The endless debate so far is only going around in circles. Use your last dying breath to add some code :) Hey, I'm coding too! I just happen to think that usage guidelines are important. 2) Get the relevant communities to form a proper proposal that reflects the results of that process Isn't that already happening? Just repeating the obvious for those not aware. 3) Get the core contributors votes for it Yes 'core' from the relevent community i.e. advocacy. Correct. 4) Propose it to the OGB Why? It should be proposed to Sun rather than the OGB. They own the trademark. Because the OGB is to whom you bring proposals to? The OGB is probably the only one that has the ability to get a polling event started? I have no idea for certain. This was just my guess. 5) Have a community vote Why? So far I have seen almost zero comments from core contributes from other communities. Is there really interest? That's a point I've slyly made in the past. For something that is rather important, very little cross-community involvement has occurred. That's part of why it's good to get a voting event going, because you can make an issue very visible. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Joerg Schilling wrote: I remember that we did aggree ~ 2.5 years ago, that Sun would not call a distro OpenSolaris. I don't know who would have made that agreement, but like all software projects, nothing is ever permanently decided, and changes to decisions can and will be made as times change and the people involved change. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Joerg Schilling wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. How about trying to prove that there is no such harm? It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. Jörg, So far Indiana is the only (in progress) distribution which has been proposed as a project on opensolaris.org. To me this is the core factor. All the other distributions are not under the mandate of the opensolaris.org and their future can not be voted on by the core contributors of the relevant communities. i.e. There is no other show in town unless you propose SchilliX as a project and have time to back it up :) Doug ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Doug Scott wrote: 4) Propose it to the OGB Why? It should be proposed to Sun rather than the OGB. They own the trademark. Officially, the OGB is the liason between the community and Sun, so you'ld at least be asking the OGB to present the proposal to Sun on behalf of the OpenSolaris community. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Isaac R. wrote: I think the question of getting access to OpenSolaris could be addressed by allowing (anyone interested in doing so) to make that decision by looking at a matrix with requirements (horizontally), and how various distro's satisfy those requirements (vertically). I tend to agree, but the devil is in the details... Could you take a stab at producing this matrix - or at least the column labels for the features/requirements that you might expect to see? A concrete example would be extremely useful about now :-) Assuming each of the distros were using Nevada as the kernel (which is available through the OpenSolaris project, and which they do), then all distro's deserve to be referenced as OpenSolaris-based, even if such Sounds like your definition of compatibility is closely related to has the same kernel... I'm looking forward to seeing what your important requirements might be. -John ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Chris Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/31/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's my point. If you want to be able to prove *why* we shouldn't have a distribution called OpenSolaris you must demonstrate the harm it would cause as the benefit has already been demonstrated and talked about. Not to be offensive, but other than hurt feelings, I don't see the harm in it. I agree with Joerg (for once--just kidding!) in that an official OpenSolaris distribution will harm other OpenSolaris-based projects. Here's why. As Ian Murdock eloquently states in the third paragraph in this very thread: ... - one answer to that question is clear to me: OpenSolaris MUST be something new users can download and install. This, of course, is meant to drive incoming eyeballs (new users) to the obvious choice, the Official OpenSolaris distro. So the eyeball will, instead of being puzzled by the myriad arrays of available distro, and instead of reading the descriptions and reading about Nexenta's debian-like packaging and ShilliX's Unix on USB, they will sheepfully click on the big green Download OpenSolaris button. * And they will not go to the other distros. And since distros need people, new people, to thrive, the Official OpenSolaris distro will be disproportionately advantaged in the draw of new users compared to other distros, who will wither away. People's decisions will not be based on the technical merit of each distro, after careful examination of the characteristics of each distro and based on their need. Rather, they will become Victims of Marketing and be funneled into OpenSolaris-that-was-Indiana. So, does it harm other distros? In the sense that they will be starved for new users, definitely. By the same logic, Ubuntu never should have succeeded since there was nothing to drive people from the Debian or any other website to it. RedHat shouldn't have been able to rise to dominance and Slackware fall, and so forth. If one of the alternative distributions provides a truly better experience, users will naturally flock to it: birds of a feather. The ability to use the OpenSolaris name is a privilege; not a right. Yes the distribution with the name gets the most visibility, but if another one provides a better experience, people will choose it despite it's goofy name (e.g. see Ubuntu). The other thing here that is going unmentioned is that the distribution is not set in stone. There is absolutely nothing preventing another project being started on OpenSolaris.org called Project Wonkers and having it become the new official distribution. The community here has the power and ability to directly drive the contents of this distribution and instead I just see a bunch of bickering about how unfair everything is. Stop complaining and do something about it! I've been watching OpenSolaris since it first launched and I've seen more progress and interest in OpenSolaris since Project Indiana was announced than ever. I don't see hordes of people flocking to Nexenta despite the fact that it provided a better experience in many ways over a year ago. This isn't about anyone's pet project getting top billing; this is about growing up and meeting the needs of our users instead of bickering about who's feelings are going to be hurt. Stop focusing on yourselves; focus on the users. We need to do what's best for the community, not our egos. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 10/31/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's my point. If you want to be able to prove *why* we shouldn't have a distribution called OpenSolaris you must demonstrate the harm it would cause as the benefit has already been demonstrated and talked about. Not to be offensive, but other than hurt feelings, I don't see the harm in it. I agree with Joerg (for once--just kidding!) in that an official OpenSolaris distribution will harm other OpenSolaris-based projects. Here's why. As Ian Murdock eloquently states in the third paragraph in this very thread: ... - one answer to that question is clear to me: OpenSolaris MUST be something new users can download and install. This, of course, is meant to drive incoming eyeballs (new users) to the obvious choice, the Official OpenSolaris distro. So the eyeball will, instead of being puzzled by the myriad arrays of available distro, and instead of reading the descriptions and reading about Nexenta's debian-like packaging and ShilliX's Unix on USB, they will sheepfully click on the big green Download OpenSolaris button. * And they will not go to the other distros. And since distros need people, new people, to thrive, the Official OpenSolaris distro will be disproportionately advantaged in the draw of new users compared to other distros, who will wither away. People's decisions will not be based on the technical merit of each distro, after careful examination of the characteristics of each distro and based on their need. Rather, they will become Victims of Marketing and be funneled into OpenSolaris-that-was-Indiana. So, does it harm other distros? In the sense that they will be starved for new users, definitely. * (I'm going to argue that people who run Sparc will find MartUX all by themselves. That's assuming that distro can still exist sans Martin Bochnig.) -- Chris Mahan http://www.christophermahan.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell 818.943.1850 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Doug Scott wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: 5) Have a community vote Why? So far I have seen almost zero comments from core contributes from other communities. Is there really interest? We have a community-wide contributors list, but it's not used very much: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/contributors/ Jim -- http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package add and remove in non-interactive mode
Nikolay Molchanov writes: I'm not suggesting to change stdio, I'm suggesting to change pkgrm code to use read(0, buf, 1); Don't forget that pkgadd and pkgrm exec many other programs (as part of the scripting interfaces, among other reasons), none of which will have your special changes. Your suggested change won't actually work. in loop to read 1 byte from standard input until the end of line or EOF happens. Basically it is the same loop as it uses to write its questions: 12580:write(2, D, 1)= 1 Indeed; the fact that it's flushing each character out is badness. It has to do with the way that stderr works, but it's still badness. In any event, it's actually unrelated to the stdin problem, because that's buffered. In this case it will leave the pointer in the input file at the beginning of next line, so the child process will read from this point. Yes, I understand the goal. I just think that trying to script something that is so clearly designed for humans is a waste of time and effort, so it's not really worth fixing. If you're really intent on doing this, I'd suggest using the 'expect' program instead. Then, at least, you'd have some control over the behavior of your script in the event that pkgadd or pkgrm issued a prompt you *weren't* expecting. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] how do I change text and background colors?
My computer is a Pentium 4 PC running Solaris Express - Developer Edition 2/07. I use CDE because the JDS has crashed on me several times (computer has no internet access, hence no updates). So what do I do to change text and back ground colors of PDF documents? My Acrobat Reader runs on CDE. Evince pdf reader also runs on CDE. So if you can show me how to change the preferences for either pdf reader, I would appreciate it. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Joerg Schilling wrote: I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. Shawn Walker wrote: I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. I *think* Joerg is referring to the classic channel partner -vs- direct sales problem - if the OpenSolaris Community has its own distro, where is there room for other distros to compete? The answer, of course, isn't simple. The status quo changes, and we all have to change or be left behind. As an awesome first non-Sun distro, Schillix broke ground that made it possible for there to /be/ non-Sun distros. But, that was 2 years ago, and finally the community is getting itself up to speed. Rather than being a private effort run outside of the OpenSolaris Community, Indiana is producing a distro within the community itself. (It is interesting to note that of these 6 initial distros, only the SX and Belinix teams seem to have put in the effort to transform their outsider distros into something done within the community) In the end, though, this is a loosely structured community, driven by those who do rather than those who talk. See a need, fill a need. Sometimes there are competing efforts and one succeeds while the other doesn't. Othertimes, both succeed wildly. It is all about choices. If Joerg or any of the other initial-distro leads had so desired, they *could have* created an OpenSolaris Community/Project to host and develop their distros; chances are that if they had, their efforts would now be the ones we would want to call OpenSolaris. Ironic, no? -John ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Shawn Walker wrote: Stop focusing on yourselves; focus on the users. We need to do what's best for the community, not our egos. I absolutely agree with Shawn on this one. We are going to have to make some tough choices, and some people will feel left out by them and that's the reality we're going to all have to face. Glynn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Isaac R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I think the question of getting access to OpenSolaris could be addressed by allowing (anyone interested in doing so) to make that decision by looking at a matrix with requirements (horizontally), and how various distro's satisfy those requirements (vertically). Assuming each of the distros were using Nevada as the kernel (which is available through the OpenSolaris project, and which they do), then all distro's deserve to be referenced as OpenSolaris-based, even if such distro's come from Sun. Similar, in some ways, to the Intel-inside marketing OpenSolaris Inside would be a nice idea. Together with a compatibility test, there could be tags like ACME RabbitOS - OpenSolaris Inside - OpenSolaris Binary compatibility type C. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. I don't believe that for a moment. Going to ubuntu.com only lets me download Ubuntu easily; but there are links that go off to other places where you can get Kubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. Many people do know that other flavours of Ubuntu exist. With current OpenSolaris distros, we have much more variance in the feeling than with different ubuntu variants. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Jim Grisanzio writes: Joerg Schilling wrote: I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris Why would Sun OpenSolaris make sense? Actually, that expression has been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use of the brand? I think it makes a lot of sense, by analogy to Linux. You can't install Linux -- without getting an immediate which one? question. You can only install a distribution of it, of which there are many. People do talk about running RedHat Linux or getting Ubuntu Linux. The Linux part is the generic term, and the distribution name makes it specific. Sun OpenSolaris and Nexenta OpenSolaris do make sense to me, at least in that light. They're shorthand expressions for Sun's Solaris distribution based on OpenSolaris and the Nexenta distribution based on OpenSolaris. I think the real issue here is that many are seeing Indiana as _Sun's_ vision, and not the or even a community vision. In that light, it becomes Sun's distribution and nobody else's. That's why the naming is such an important thing. Frankly, I don't really know which viewpoint is correct. But I do think we're going to have to acknowledge and address those differing views if we're going to make any progress. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. I don't believe that for a moment. Going to ubuntu.com only lets me download Ubuntu easily; but there are links that go off to other places where you can get Kubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. Many people do know that other flavours of Ubuntu exist. With current OpenSolaris distros, we have much more variance in the feeling than with different ubuntu variants. Which is an interesting tidbit, but doesn't disprove my point. Remember that one of the goals in using the trademark is to set user expectations. If, as you say, we have much more variance right now between OpenSolaris distributions than usage of the trademark should be restricted accordingly. Setting user expectations should be a primary goal for any distribution. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Doug Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. Jörg, So far Indiana is the only (in progress) distribution which has been proposed as a project on opensolaris.org. To me this is the core factor. The core factor is that I did _ask_ for cooperation on the OpenSolaris mailing list. Instead of cooperating, people did start their own projects. Belenix has no really different goals than SchilliX and it would have been normal to cooperate. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 10/31/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Stop focusing on yourselves; focus on the users. We need to do what's best for the community, not our egos. I absolutely agree with Shawn on this one. We are going to have to make some tough choices, and some people will feel left out by them and that's the reality we're going to all have to face. Ok, but there's where I com from: I am a user. I am a consumer, not a producer, of operating systems. I build web applications. I use debian stable (Etch) as my OS of choice right now, on one dedicated and several virtual servers. Yes, I select my os, download it, congure it, and run it myself. I use Solaris 9 at the office and F'in hate it. I also don't like Ubuntu that much, and I don't care for RH, although I've used it. I tried Mandriva for a bit and that wasn't my cup of tea. I've not messed with anything else since I found debian because it hits my sweet spot. So you can consider me as a dispassionate user who wants a top-of-the-line, dynamic OS. I really want ShilliX to do well because thanks to python I can make offline web servers available (WSGI+framework+SQLite for those interested) and I want to be able to have a OS+Server+application+browser on USB, self-launchable, that will work offline and online the same way. (webservices back end on server when connected to the net). That's the kind of thing I want. I care not for this or that distro, but I am experienced enough to understand that diversity breeds diversity and I want the OpenSolaris world to be defined by diversity and not by a one-trick-pony OS. I also don't work for Sun so I don't have to watch my words or attitude for fear of the HR axe. If some of you find what I say grating to their sensibilities, tough. -- Chris Mahan http://www.christophermahan.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell 818.943.1850 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. I don't believe that for a moment. Going to ubuntu.com only lets me download Ubuntu easily; but there are links that go off to other places where you can get Kubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. Many people do know that other flavours of Ubuntu exist. With current OpenSolaris distros, we have much more variance in the feeling than with different ubuntu variants. Agreed. That's why its easy to image, down the road, variants of Indiana such as (for example): OpenSolaris Indiana OpenSolaris Indiana TestDrive OpenSolaris Indiana Desktop OpenSolaris Indiana Server OpenSolaris Indiana Workstation in the same way we see (today): Ubuntu Desktop Edition Ubuntu Server Edition with room to grow in any direction in the (near-term/far-term) future. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ Graduate from sugar-coating school? Sorry - I never attended! :) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, James Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim Grisanzio writes: Joerg Schilling wrote: I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris Why would Sun OpenSolaris make sense? Actually, that expression has been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use of the brand? I think it makes a lot of sense, by analogy to Linux. You can't install Linux -- without getting an immediate which one? question. You can only install a distribution of it, of which there are many. People do talk about running RedHat Linux or getting Ubuntu Linux. The Linux part is the generic term, and the distribution name makes it specific. Sun OpenSolaris and Nexenta OpenSolaris do make sense to me, at least in that light. They're shorthand expressions for Sun's Solaris distribution based on OpenSolaris and the Nexenta distribution based on OpenSolaris. Except Sun doesn't have a distribution that is really based on the work of OpenSolaris.org right now. The implication here is that Project Indiana is Sun's distribution; which is not true. Project Indiana is a distribution birthed by members of the OpenSolaris community, discussed and developed here within reason, and a product of the efforts of the members of this community as a project (*in the strict sense*) officially recognized by this community. Therefore it would not be proper to call the OpenSolaris Developer Preview Sun's OpenSolaris Developer Preview because the distribution is the result of OpenSolaris.org and not Sun. I think the real issue here is that many are seeing Indiana as _Sun's_ vision, and not the or even a community vision. In that light, it becomes Sun's distribution and nobody else's. That's why the naming is such an important thing. The converse is true; some community members here see it as a OpenSolaris.org project; not a Sun one. I don't think Sun has any interest in commercially marketing a product under anything but the name Solaris. So let's leave the subjective views aside and focus on what best represents our community. Frankly, I don't really know which viewpoint is correct. But I do think we're going to have to acknowledge and address those differing views if we're going to make any progress. Indeed. Let's stir the pot some more... -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Chris Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/31/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Stop focusing on yourselves; focus on the users. We need to do what's best for the community, not our egos. I absolutely agree with Shawn on this one. We are going to have to make some tough choices, and some people will feel left out by them and that's the reality we're going to all have to face. Ok, but there's where I com from: I am a user. I am a consumer, not a producer, of operating systems. I build web applications. I use debian stable (Etch) as my OS of choice right now, on one dedicated and several virtual servers. Yes, I select my os, download it, congure it, and run it myself. I use Solaris 9 at the office and F'in hate it. I also don't like Ubuntu that much, and I don't care for RH, although I've used it. I tried Mandriva for a bit and that wasn't my cup of tea. I've not messed with anything else since I found debian because it hits my sweet spot. So you can consider me as a dispassionate user who wants a top-of-the-line, dynamic OS. I really want ShilliX to do well because thanks to python I can make offline web servers available (WSGI+framework+SQLite for those interested) and I want to be able to have a OS+Server+application+browser on USB, self-launchable, that will work offline and online the same way. (webservices back end on server when connected to the net). That's the kind of thing I want. I care not for this or that distro, but I am experienced enough to understand that diversity breeds diversity and I want the OpenSolaris world to be defined by diversity and not by a one-trick-pony OS. I also don't work for Sun so I don't have to watch my words or attitude for fear of the HR axe. If some of you find what I say grating to their sensibilities, tough. I see nothing in what you've stated that conflicts with having a distribution called OpenSolaris. Ubuntu thrived despite Debian's long years of existence. Slackware continues despite RedHat's rise. SUSE continues despite RedHat. Mandraiva continues despite ... etc. As I implied before, users ultimately determine the life and death of a brand or product and the community is in control here. If users start flocking to something else, then do something about it! That's what Project Indiana is about; growing the community and capturing users. Can *anyone* prove to me how a project that *improve* and grow our community is to our detriment? It's been two years now and other distributions have had every opportunity to grow their communities. Do we want to remain a niche community for the next two years or are we ready to grow up and start meeting the expectations of our users? I would hope we're mature enough now to start doing whatever it takes to meet the expectations of users. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 11:44 -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: I've been watching OpenSolaris since it first launched and I've seen more progress and interest in OpenSolaris since Project Indiana was announced than ever. I agree, this is the impression I'm getting as well - it's not about competing with ourselves, it's ultimately about having a larger number of people use OpenSolaris, and calling something OpenSolaris seems like a pretty basic thing that we can do *now* to help that cause. If Indiana opens the doors to more people who eventually move to running hacked versions of OpenSolaris on their Toaster or Train Set, or WebApp, or TV[1], or whatever then that's a good thing for the community. Dredging up the past, or looking at where we've come from wrt. distributions isn't making forward progress. I say, let's run with what's happening now, and see where it takes us. Come on in, the water's fine! Stop focusing on yourselves; focus on the users. We need to do what's best for the community, not our egos. +1 cheers, tim [1] Don't knock it, there's a precedent :-) http://flickr.com/photos/timf/1638454799/ -- Tim Foster, Sun Microsystems Inc, Solaris Engineering Ops http://blogs.sun.com/timf ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Chris Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/31/07, Tim Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dredging up the past, or looking at where we've come from wrt. distributions isn't making forward progress. I say, let's run with what's happening now, and see where it takes us. Come on in, the water's fine! I personally think more distros haven't come up because the code to fully compile the OS isn't all open-sourced. I could be wrong, of course. This is just my gut feeling. I'd say that it's more likely because it's *dang hard work*. However, with the advent of the Distribution Constructor, prepare for a flood :) That's why we need those guidelines! Snap to it folks! -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 10/31/07, Tim Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dredging up the past, or looking at where we've come from wrt. distributions isn't making forward progress. I say, let's run with what's happening now, and see where it takes us. Come on in, the water's fine! I personally think more distros haven't come up because the code to fully compile the OS isn't all open-sourced. I could be wrong, of course. This is just my gut feeling. -- Chris Mahan http://www.christophermahan.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell 818.943.1850 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. I don't believe that for a moment. Going to ubuntu.com only lets me download Ubuntu easily; but there are links that go off to other places where you can get Kubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. Many people do know that other flavours of Ubuntu exist. With current OpenSolaris distros, we have much more variance in the feeling than with different ubuntu variants. Which is an interesting tidbit, but doesn't disprove my point. Remember that one of the goals in using the trademark is to set user expectations. If, as you say, we have much more variance right now between OpenSolaris distributions than usage of the trademark should be restricted accordingly. Setting user expectations should be a primary goal for any distribution. And differentiating. Why would/should a user chose one distribution over another? It's not solely based on what it is called, but what it offers. Like with Ubuntu, which keeps getting brought up, each distro targets a specific market. Variations are what are all the distros should be going for, as has always been the case. And with good TM guidelines in place, we can form a family of compatible distributions that focus on different areas and carry the OpenSolaris name. I have yet to find any fault in anything Shawn has said. It's getting a little creepy. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Jim Grisanzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris Why would Sun OpenSolaris make sense? Actually, that expression has been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use of the brand? As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim Grisanzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris Why would Sun OpenSolaris make sense? Actually, that expression has been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use of the brand? As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it. That is incorrect; the proposed guidelines would allow them to use the name with the single restriction that they could not call themselves OpenSolaris. Sun is not the one using the trademark here; Sun is allowing an OpenSolaris.org project called Project Indiana to use the trademark to represent their project. It would be no different if I had started Project Wonkers and gotten Sun's permission to use the trademark. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If Joerg or any of the other initial-distro leads had so desired, they *could have* created an OpenSolaris Community/Project to host and develop their distros; chances are that if they had, their efforts would now be the ones we would want to call OpenSolaris. Ironic, no? Some of your (removed) statements are correct, but this is misunderstanding the problem. There was a community for SchilliX, but some core people did disappear. SchilliX is not dead but from my experiences with trying to get new people that help, just creating an OpenSolaris Community/Project would not help. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Chris Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/31/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's my point. If you want to be able to prove *why* we shouldn't have a distribution called OpenSolaris you must demonstrate the harm it would cause as the benefit has already been demonstrated and talked about. Not to be offensive, but other than hurt feelings, I don't see the harm in it. I agree with Joerg (for once--just kidding!) in that an official OpenSolaris distribution will harm other OpenSolaris-based projects. Here's why. As Ian Murdock eloquently states in the third paragraph in this very thread: ... - one answer to that question is clear to me: OpenSolaris MUST be something new users can download and install. This, of course, is meant to drive incoming eyeballs (new users) to the obvious choice, the Official OpenSolaris distro. So the eyeball will, instead of being puzzled by the myriad arrays of available distro, and instead of reading the descriptions and reading about Nexenta's debian-like packaging and ShilliX's Unix on USB, they will sheepfully click on the big green Download OpenSolaris button. * And they will not go to the other distros. And since distros need people, new people, to thrive, the Official OpenSolaris distro will be disproportionately advantaged in the draw of new users compared to other distros, who will wither away. People's decisions will not be based on the technical merit of each distro, after careful examination of the characteristics of each distro and based on their need. Rather, they will become Victims of Marketing and be funneled into OpenSolaris-that-was-Indiana. So, does it harm other distros? In the sense that they will be starved for new users, definitely. By the same logic, Ubuntu never should have succeeded since there was nothing to drive people from the Debian or any other website to it. RedHat shouldn't have been able to rise to dominance and Slackware fall, and so forth. If one of the alternative distributions provides a truly better experience, users will naturally flock to it: birds of a feather. The ability to use the OpenSolaris name is a privilege; not a right. ^^^ This is absolutely correct. And, along with the ownership of that trademark comes the responsibility of having to defend its use - even in the face of a McBride/SCO type (never-ending) court challenge. It's Suns trademark and they have the right to use it and mandate how it can/should be used. But they are also prepared to pony up anything from $100k to $1m+ to defend it. If someone in the community says that this is unfair, then my first question to them is: are you prepared to spend $1m of your own money to defend this valuable trademark? It's also unfair that Googles founders get to fly their 767 into a private airfield in Mountain View CA - almost their own backyard - while we have to endure getting stuck in commuter traffic! Life is unfair - get over it. But what makes this completely fair, is that we, as individuals, have the ability to define our own trademark and our own OpenSolaris based distribution and the ability to startup our own Google alternative. Yes the distribution with the name gets the most visibility, but if another one provides a better experience, people will choose it despite it's goofy name (e.g. see Ubuntu). The other thing here that is going unmentioned is that the distribution is not set in stone. There is absolutely nothing preventing another project being started on OpenSolaris.org called Project Wonkers and having it become the new official distribution. The community here has the power and ability to directly drive the contents of this distribution and instead I just see a bunch of bickering about how unfair everything is. Stop complaining and do something about it! +1 I've been watching OpenSolaris since it first launched and I've seen more progress and interest in OpenSolaris since Project Indiana was announced than ever. +1 And I've been in favor of this project (after I recovered from the initial shock of Ian Murdock being hired by Sun) - because it means that people are putting money and talented developer manhours into making OpenSolaris even better. We (as in the community) are getting a new installer, a new packaging/distribution mechanism and an improved patching mechanism - and thats just for starters. Who is *not* in favor of that. How unfair is that!? Are you kidding - this is *great* for OpenSolaris (the Project) and I don't care who thinks its unfair that Sun owns the OpenSolaris trademark and wants to associate some flavor of that name to describe a resulting distribution which they have largely sponsored. I don't see hordes of people flocking to Nexenta despite the fact that it provided a better experience in many
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 10/31/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really, I don't see the problem here. Don't you see? Ian acknowledged that there are serious misgiving with his proposal/dictate. The community was earnestly working with Sun's representatives, and making progress towards a set of guidelines for use of the OpenSolaris trademark. (A mailing list, was created specifically for this purpose: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Ian decided to ignore that work. Ignoring the trademark and naming project, Ian put forth Sun's/Jonathon's wishes into effect. (Make no mistake, Ian and Jonathon speak for Sun, not the community. No one ever elected them to represent the community nor to make decisions allowing them to take action on what they feel is best for my community). With this blatant disregard for community process, (and the OpenSolaris constitution) what can we as a community do to change anything, other than vote with our feet? (Shawn, I hope you have a really good answer, because you seem to be speaking for Sun marketing now, and there are many people who are very upset about this, both within and outside of Sun.) Anyone who says that Indiana followed the OpenSolaris Community's Constitutional process, is incorrect. In our constitutional method, the Indiana project would have called upon the OGB to facilitate a community vote of *ALL* the core contribs. IE: As an issue that is a community-wide decision requires a vote would not be limited to the advocacy CG... See first sentence of article III of the constitution: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/governance/;jsessionid=9488BF7333F02856A5A068FD58038871 If, and only if, this vote passed would the OGB go forth and present this to Sun, to see if this would be allowed. (The OGB is after all supposed to be the official liason to Sun.) At that point it would be Sun's call whether or not to allow Indiana to be branded OpenSolaris. The fact is that all the distros are OpenSolaris and they are all community distros. If we are going to elevate one to an exalted status, it must *NOT* be done by Sun executive decision. -Brian P.S. - The same reasons Sun chose not to call SXCE OpenSolaris apply to Indiana. Built with closed source bits, behind Sun firewalls. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. How about trying to prove that there is no such harm? How could that possibly be done? It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. FWIW, as a third party that develops software on Solaris, I would welcome an 'OpenSolaris Reference' distribution. Without it, we would be forced to choose one or two of the dists available to try to officially support, much as we have to do now on Linux. -- Happy cheese in fear | Jon Trulson against oppressor, rebel!| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Brocolli, hostage. -Unknown| #include std/disclaimer.h ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
James Carlson wrote: I think the real issue here is that many are seeing Indiana as _Sun's_ vision, and not the or even a community vision. In that light, it becomes Sun's distribution and nobody else's. That's why the naming is such an important thing. Frankly, I don't really know which viewpoint is correct. But I do think we're going to have to acknowledge and address those differing views if we're going to make any progress. There should have been a vote. That is why we have people with voting rights - so we have a formal mechanism for gauging the views of the community on important changes which affect the entire community. This is clearly such an issue. -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Eric Boutilier wrote: As Alan Coopersmith just alluded to, it's not up to the OGB to mandate a vote. (Nor is it up to Sun of course); and among those who do have the power -- Community Groups and their Contributors -- there isn't a collective push to put it to a vote. That's a ludicrous position. If the OGB doesn't mandate what will and will not be voted on, who will? or are you suggesting that we need a vote to decide what to vote on? Oh wait, that probably requires a vote to see if we need to decide that we need a vote on which things to vote on... Thus, concedingly, +1 from me too, which I'm declaring simply because I'd like to be on record as among those who dissented -- albeit from what appears to be a very large majority view. The whole point of any voting mechanism is to gauge the opinion of the electorate. Without that you get into the farcical position we see so often in the OpenSolaris 'community', where multiple small subsets of the 'community' all simultaneously claim to speak for the majority, with no evidence to support their claim. We have democratic mechanisms, we should damn well use them. -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Joerg Schilling wrote: Jim Grisanzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris Why would Sun OpenSolaris make sense? Actually, that expression has been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use of the brand? As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it. We have been discussing TM guidelines and usage scenarios for the past two weeks. We are working to create NEW guidelines. Yes, the current (past) guidelines have been restrictive. I'd like to see you work with the rest of us on how to create new guidelines that work better for all distributions. Jörg ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Al Hopper wrote: And I've been in favor of this project (after I recovered from the initial shock of Ian Murdock being hired by Sun) - because it means that people are putting money and talented developer manhours into making OpenSolaris even better. We (as in the community) are getting a new installer, a new packaging/distribution mechanism and an improved patching mechanism - and thats just for starters. Who is *not* in favor of that. How unfair is that!? Are you kidding - this is *great* for OpenSolaris (the Project) and I don't care who thinks its unfair that Sun owns the OpenSolaris trademark and wants to associate some flavor of that name to describe a resulting distribution which they have largely sponsored. I don't want to rain on your parade, but all those things you mentioned would have happened even if Indiana hadn't come along. Granted, they've probably happened a little faster, but they are all areas that were already being worked on. -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 10/31/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Except Sun doesn't have a distribution that is really based on the work of OpenSolaris.org right now. The implication here is that Project Indiana is Sun's distribution; which is not true. Input to the contrary couldn't have been more specific and to the point: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007-October/000145.html http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007-October/000158.html While this need not preclude the naming privilege to Indiana as discussed in that thread, Ignoring these inputs and re-iterating the stance doesn't make the argument credible. -Shiv ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, S h i v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/31/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Except Sun doesn't have a distribution that is really based on the work of OpenSolaris.org right now. The implication here is that Project Indiana is Sun's distribution; which is not true. Input to the contrary couldn't have been more specific and to the point: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007-October/000145.html http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007-October/000158.html That input is not a fact; it is a personal evaluation. I happen to disagree with that evaluation. You may see this as Sun's project alone; I do not. I see it as a project representative of the OpenSolaris.org community's work. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Jon Trulson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. How about trying to prove that there is no such harm? How could that possibly be done? That's not my problem; I have no interest in proving its harm. The onus of proving a point is upon the person who claimed it. It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro OpenSolaris, many people believe that this is the one and only. FWIW, as a third party that develops software on Solaris, I would welcome an 'OpenSolaris Reference' distribution. Without it, we would be forced to choose one or two of the dists available to try to officially support, much as we have to do now on Linux. Exactly! -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Shawn Walker wrote: The important thing to remember here is that no official decision has been made. Instead of a bunch of people running around grumpy, let's take this opportunity to ensure that we participate in the branding and trademark discussion taking place on trademark-policy-dev. Please explain why there is any point in participating in a process where the decisions are made without the mandate of the voting members of the opensolaris community. Before we have something truly official, the advocacy community (and possibly others) need to propose something to the OGB and then a vote needs to happen. Agreed. Remember that Sun can use the trademark in whatever way they choose but they don't control the communities here. Instead of acting as if Sun has made any decisions for you, use the abilities given to you by the constitution you voted for. 1) Get involved in the discussion, be a part of the process 2) Get the relevant communities to form a proper proposal that reflects the results of that process 3) Get the core contributors votes for it 4) Propose it to the OGB 5) Have a community vote Really, I don't see the problem here. If a ballot is announced, I won't see a problem either. -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 31/10/2007, Brian Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ian decided to ignore that work. Ignoring the trademark and naming Really? How so? He very clearly stated in the original post that started this bruhaha that this is a work in progress and invited others to contribute to it. With this blatant disregard for community process, (and the OpenSolaris constitution) what can we as a community do to change anything, other than vote with our feet? (Shawn, I hope you have a really good answer, because you seem to be speaking for Sun marketing now, and there are many people who are very upset about this, both within and outside of Sun.) People are free to think what they like; I've never been on Sun's payroll or anyone that even uses Solaris. At last check, I don't see how I'm speaking for Sun marketing. I'm just a community member providing my particular viewpoint as part of the ongoing discussions within this community. If my views happen to coincide with someone else, that is coincidence and nothing more. Quite frankly, I hope lots of people get upset -- and participate! I'd rather see passionate, angry people than stagnation. The beauty of an open community is diversity; I don't agree with your viewpoint surrounding this project and you don't agree with mine. But that's ok! Just as you are free to support and espouse your particular views here, so am I. Anyone who says that Indiana followed the OpenSolaris Community's Constitutional process, is incorrect. In our constitutional method, the Indiana project would have called upon the OGB to facilitate a community vote of *ALL* the core contribs. IE: As an issue that is a community-wide decision requires a vote would not be limited to the advocacy CG... See first sentence of article III of the constitution: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/governance/;jsessionid=9488BF7333F02856A5A068FD58038871 It is entirely possible that the current issue isn't even addressed by the constitution. However, yes, I'd like to see a vote happen and one can still occur. The fact is that all the distros are OpenSolaris and they are all community distros. If we are going to elevate one to an exalted status, it must *NOT* be done by Sun executive decision. Then continue participating in the branding discussions and don't let that happen. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor... --Larry Wall ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Eric Boutilier wrote: As Alan Coopersmith just alluded to, it's not up to the OGB to mandate a vote. That wasn't quite my point - if there is a proposal ready to be put to a vote, it would be the OGB who put forth the vote to the members, but I haven't seen any proposal yet that's ready to be voted on. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
[ Moving to advocacy-discuss ] On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: Eric Boutilier wrote: As Alan Coopersmith just alluded to, it's not up to the OGB to mandate a vote. (Nor is it up to Sun of course); and among those who do have the power -- Community Groups and their Contributors -- there isn't a collective push to put it to a vote. That's a ludicrous position. If the OGB doesn't mandate what will and will not be voted on, who will? You're right, a mandate to hold a vote has to come from the top appellate court (the OGB in our case). My point, more correctly stated, is that the OGB chose not to mandate a vote due to lack of justification, which was due to the relative weakness of the push coming from Community Groups and Contributors to do so. ... Thus, concedingly, +1 from me too, which I'm declaring simply because I'd like to be on record as among those who dissented -- albeit from what appears to be a very large majority view. The whole point of any voting mechanism is to gauge the opinion of the electorate. Without that you get into the farcical position we see so often in the OpenSolaris 'community', where multiple small subsets of the 'community' all simultaneously claim to speak for the majority, with no evidence to support their claim. We have democratic mechanisms, we should damn well use them. Agreed. We're certainly being watched very closely by the rest of the FOSS/UNIX/Linux world -- and from day one we've been breaking exciting new ground in that world in tons of wonderful ways -- but utlimately, I'd argue, how we use our democratic mechanisms will be their acid test of our open-ness. Make or break, so to speak. Eric ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Shawn Walker wrote: On 31/10/2007, Jon Trulson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More than 2 years ago, we did agreee that noone except Sun has the right to call a distro OpenSolaris and that Sun shoul/would not do this. I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called: Sun OpenSolaris I have problems if this was not labelled with Sun as this would cause harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions. I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly *how* other distributions would be harmed. How about trying to prove that there is no such harm? How could that possibly be done? That's not my problem; I have no interest in proving its harm. The onus of proving a point is upon the person who claimed it. heh, I think that one was for Joerg, not you :) [...] -- Happy cheese in fear | Jon Trulson against oppressor, rebel!| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Brocolli, hostage. -Unknown| #include std/disclaimer.h ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] DTrace Graphical User Interface (GUI)
The new version of the NetBeans DTrace GUI plug-in is ready for download. http://www.netbeans.org/kb/dtracegui_plugin/NetBeans_DTrace_GUI_Plugin.html The NetBeans DTrace GUI plug-in works with Sun Studio 12 IDE, NetBeans IDE 5.5.1 and NetBeans 6.0 Beta 2. Regards, __Nasser This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: Al Hopper wrote: And I've been in favor of this project (after I recovered from the initial shock of Ian Murdock being hired by Sun) - because it means that people are putting money and talented developer manhours into making OpenSolaris even better. We (as in the community) are getting a new installer, a new packaging/distribution mechanism and an improved patching mechanism - and thats just for starters. Who is *not* in favor of that. How unfair is that!? Are you kidding - this is *great* for OpenSolaris (the Project) and I don't care who thinks its unfair that Sun owns the OpenSolaris trademark and wants to associate some flavor of that name to describe a resulting distribution which they have largely sponsored. I don't want to rain on your parade, but all those things you mentioned would have happened even if Indiana hadn't come along. Granted, they've probably happened a little faster, but they are all areas that were already being worked on. Yes - I understand that. Someone at the Summit said that the new installer has been a work-in-progress for about 2 years (not sure how accurate that number is). And I understand that Indiana is acting as a catalyst and focusing the various development teams on a common completion timeline. This will have a large and very positive impact on the end user experience! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ Graduate from sugar-coating school? Sorry - I never attended! :) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Eric Boutilier wrote: That's a ludicrous position. If the OGB doesn't mandate what will and will not be voted on, who will? You're right, a mandate to hold a vote has to come from the top appellate court (the OGB in our case). My point, more correctly stated, is that the OGB chose not to mandate a vote due to lack of justification, which was due to the relative weakness of the push coming from Community Groups and Contributors to do so. That's an interesting statement, however it's from you and not the OGB. It appears to me at least that there's been plenty of justification for the OGB to become involved, and at least one OGB member has said that the OGB has not been formally consulted at all about this issue - that hardly supports your assertion. Perhaps someone from the OGB would care to comment? Or perhaps we should expect their usual torpor to continue... -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Eric Boutilier wrote: [ Moving to advocacy-discuss ] On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Alan Burlison wrote: Eric Boutilier wrote: As Alan Coopersmith just alluded to, it's not up to the OGB to mandate a vote. (Nor is it up to Sun of course); and among those who do have the power -- Community Groups and their Contributors -- there isn't a collective push to put it to a vote. That's a ludicrous position. If the OGB doesn't mandate what will and will not be voted on, who will? You're right, a mandate to hold a vote has to come from the top appellate court (the OGB in our case). My point, more correctly stated, is that the OGB chose not to mandate a vote due to lack of justification, which was due to the relative weakness of the push coming from Community Groups and Contributors to do so. I just realized the above has lost some context, so just to be clear... When I say push above, I'm referring only to the naming of the today's release. I aware there's a plan in the works to have a vote on trademark policy aimed at future naming decisions. Eric ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Al Hopper wrote: I don't want to rain on your parade, but all those things you mentioned would have happened even if Indiana hadn't come along. Granted, they've probably happened a little faster, but they are all areas that were already being worked on. Yes - I understand that. Someone at the Summit said that the new installer has been a work-in-progress for about 2 years (not sure how accurate that number is). And I understand that Indiana is acting as a catalyst and focusing the various development teams on a common completion timeline. This will have a large and very positive impact on the end user experience! You original post implied to me at least that Indiana was the progenitor of those features. Over the last 6 months or so there has been a tendency to rewrite opensolaris history to suit whatever is soup de jour. I think it is important that we keep clear about what happened, when and why. -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Eric Boutilier wrote: I just realized the above has lost some context, so just to be clear... When I say push above, I'm referring only to the naming of the today's release. I aware there's a plan in the works to have a vote on trademark policy aimed at future naming decisions. What will be the point of having a vote on something that is a fait accompli? -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
