* Peter Tribble <peter.tribble at gmail.com> [2007-09-30 21:16]:
> While there exists an OpenSolaris install strategy, that strategy
> explicitly does not encompass packaging and patching, for which a
> separate strategy is needed.
> 
> Development of such a strategy is sorely needed. Especially given
> current concerns over where packaging is headed. We should be asking:
> 
>  - What are the future needs that the package/patch system needs to
> address?
> 
>  - What are the shortcomings of the current system?
> 
>  - What steps need to be taken to fix the current problems and address
> future needs?

  This sounds like a very good idea to me.  One aspect that I think has
  been lurking, but perhaps not made clear, is that some projects are
  working under the implicit schedule attached to Indiana:  a preview
  this fall, an updated preview in the new year, and a release next
  spring.  (This schedule is aggressive.)  It would be very helpful to
  write a strategy that incorporates the fact that phased deliveries are
  expected--with the right amount of progress, they might even build
  credibility that we are actually trying to make access to a larger set
  of software simpler.

  Obviously, I have a strategy in my head, but I'm happy to dump that
  out and share it, and insert a modified one.  (It doesn't work exactly
  like that, I guess...)  

  I don't mind pursuing in parallel that set of questions and possible
  answers and developing a requirements section as well, possibly out of
  the list you included.  (Easy to offer because I agree, in part, with
  many--if not most--of them, and those ones have representation in
  pkg(5).)

  - Stephen


Reply via email to