Cyril Plisko wrote:
>> and since we are quickly moving towards
>> a major release classification for Nevada/ON, which gives one (and probably
>
> Wow, that's interesting !
s/we are/I believe we are/
See my earlier email exploring this topic, starting last April and May with:
http://archive.netbsd.se/?ml=opensolaris-discuss&a=2007-03&t=3397845
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=118803
http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=58528&tstart=60
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/arc-discuss/2008-April/000817.html
and others where we have discussed relaxing our heavy handed "minor release
means absolutely no incompatible changes in /any/ part of nevada" mindset to
allow us to at least consider changing the default for df, $SHELL and (gasp)
maybe even $PATH.
Recently (at the summit) we talked more about this in terms of repositories
and how that might change how we build things.
Nothing is set in stone, except maybe for my belief that trying to do
both "Solaris10.next" and "OpenSolaris.modernization" at the same time
and in the same minor release bound source tree is not the right answer.
-John
