On 5/4/07, Peter Tribble <peter.tribble at gmail.com> wrote: > On 5/4/07, David.Comay at sun.com <David.Comay at sun.com> wrote: > > With respect to CCD and SFW, I've been thinking along the same lines. > > In general, I completely agree with this although longer term I don't > > see a need to introduce any more CCD packages. Instead what I would > > propose is that all such externally-derived open source be integrated > > into the SFW effort. CCD could continue to exist for Solaris 10 but > > for future releases, externally-derived open source could come through > > SFW. > > I don't like this. The problem with it is that if it follows existing > practices
Keep in mind by having Blastwave's S11 consolidation, following OpenSolaris' it will be possible for an Sun Solaris 11 customer to type: sfw-get upgrade-latest gawk, and have it write over the included version. (We get rid of patches, and just upgrade packages) Some other option might be upgrade-base, and upgrade-unstable > Now, either we can get to a state where we can rapidly integrate new > versions of software into the stable SFW tree very soon after their > release (which seems unlikely, given that much of the software we're > talking about doesn't have strong stability guarantees), or we need > a separate track into which the new versions can be injected. And yes, > this will often mean that there are multiple versions of the same app > on the system at the same time. Software is vetted through Blastwave S11. > So I think we need at least 2 different efforts. What the second > one ought to be based on I'm not sure. > > (And yes, even for the software I myself build and maintain, > I usually find myself maintaining multiple versions - one for > stability and maintaining dependencies, and a second to get > all the new features, and maybe others.) Exactly... I suspect the SFW and coolwave maintainers will eventually have a good deal of overlap. -Brian
