Kyle McDonald wrote: > Dave Miner wrote: >> Kyle McDonald wrote: >>> Dave Miner wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Before or after all the changes in OS go through the ARC? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Is there a particular reason this is a concern? We will be working >>>> through ARC review of the packaging and installation technologies, >>>> just not sure I understand why that's a concern. >>>> >>> It seems there are some incompatible changes to the system defaults, >>> and I'd like to still have SXCE as an alternative at least as long as >>> it takes to see whether or not those changes are going to stick, or >>> if they'll be changed yet again by the ARC review. >>> >> >> Anything you see in SXCE right now is similarly subject to change, I >> just have to run appropriate ARC cases. We've just done you a favor >> already and told you that certain technologies in it are a dead end >> before that process starts, and you have an unprecedented (for this >> community) opportunity to start using their replacements as soon as >> they're even remotely functional. > Ok. Maybe I was mistaken. I thought the ARC has the capability to reject > or change things submitted to it (not that it will - I'm only looking > forward to hearing the discussions that take place and the opinions of > the memebers.) But maybe you're right, maybe the changes are all a > foregone conclusion and there's nothing that anyone can say that will > change them further (note, I didn't say 'change them back.') >> >> Overall, the content included in OpenSolaris is 95+% identical to the >> same included in SXCE. I'm not going to be baited into another repeat >> of the tired shell discussion here > No baiting was intended. I agree with the shell change. > > I'm just looking to hear the experts chime in, and see what issues are > raised and how they'll be resolved. I'd like to switch over once it's > all been decided. >
Jim's responded to some extent, but let me add that the ARC evaluates proposals against a context that includes release bindings. Changes that are proposed with a major release binding would be evaluated differently than those against a minor or micro release. OpenSolaris has operated without a formal release binding definition so far; that more or less means it's a major release at the moment. Nevada/SXCE has, so far, operated as a minor release like its predecessors, though it's regarded as "under development" and thus changes that appear in one SXCE build could be incompatibly changed in a later SXCE build. Anything in SXCE that hasn't been backported to S10 isn't really any more stable than anything in OpenSolaris, when you think about it. So if you're using SXCE already, you might as well just use OpenSolaris. Dave
