On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Linda Kateley <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 11/22/11 12:24 PM, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: >> >> Hi Linda, All, >> >> This is explicitly what I and those I work with in the OpenIndiana community >> did not want - Nexenta releasing an officially blessed Illumos distro. > > I don't understand this. Why shouldn't nexenta have an illumos distro? our > current distro is still based opensolaris b134. >> >> This turns Illumos into FreeBSD - a Kernel closely aligned with its userland. >> >> I'd suggest if Nexenta is making a distribution, that they give it a >> non-Illumos associated name. > > this is important, we didn't think of this. thanks, we just thought it was > descriptive.
We want keep the Debian packaging project open to the community. As with "illumos-userland" for the shared userland it's derived from I think there is merit in keeping the name for the Debian packaging *project*. However, the current releases of the actual software are entirely constructed by Nexenta, and should clearly indicate that even if we want to avoid Nexenta branding. It should not use labels that could be mistaken for endorsement by the illumos community. -Albert ------------------------------------------- illumos-discuss Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182180/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182180/21175430-2e6923be Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21175430&id_secret=21175430-6a77cda4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
