>Casper, > >Bluntly, that's simply incorrect. There is ample knowledge of >how people use Jumpstart--and what does and doesn't work there. There's >also a willingness to step back and make sure that we're solving the >correct problem, and that problem is not "how is it done currently >in Jumpstart". The "let's build on what people currently do" approach >didn't get us to dTrace, ZFS, or (at least in the case of Solaris) IPS, >and isn't the obvious right answer for AI either. It may end up being >the right answer, but if we don't ask that question, we don't know.
Well clearly you can spell dTrace, but that's where the similarity falls on its face. dTrace - would you notice it if you install a new release? ZFS would you noticed it when you install (well, it asks for it now, but). They are excellent new technologies. They're disruptive in one sense but they're not require you to re-educate your staff. You don't actually need to use them. Install, packaging and jumpstart are not "hot" but they work; changing them requires a LOT of training for ALL customers. I hope that you understand what such changes costs for our customers. I'm not impressed by IPS either; for where I sit, installing a single package, when it works, takes a LOT of time. It's not a whole more functional than pkgget (or whatever they had on Blastwave) And please, don't claim that your project is the "next dTrace" or the "next ZFS"; Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy. >Would you like to be part of the solution, or just make more rude >comments about my team? I'd suggest the former as a more productive >use of everyone's time. Scores of people have send me private email that you guys don't listen; and that they have given up talking part of install-discuss and others. In minutes after I send the message. Before you consider me rude, please read the rest of the thread. Casper
