> On 9/28/07, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote: > > Proposal: Adopt Conary as the standard packaging and distribution > > framework for OpenSolaris.
I can't agree to that request. For one. it involves making a snap decision, and I simply don't think we can just go ahead and do that. For two, to make such a decision would require two things; first, to have developed a packaging strategy based on future needs and current shortcomings, that would give us a framework in which to make such decisions. Second, to have done a proper community evaluation of Conary. Now, I'm going to try and start a conversation on the strategy part. For Conary, perhaps a minor revision of Brian's request to create a project to evaluate Conary for its suitability in the OpenSolaris context, and that that project have equal standing (in terms of eligibility to be chosen) as any other proposed packaging system. (Related to the last one, I would love to be able to propose that the existing SVR4 packaging system be enhanced to meet our future needs, as I believe that it can not only do so but do so extremely well. It has 4 things going for it: it exists; it works at the moment; systems and admins know how to use it; it's compatible with large quantities of existing 3rd-party software. Because of interdependencies with patching, the installer, and live upgrade, nobody in the (non-Sun) community can actually do any serious work on the SVR4 packaging system, so I'm stuck.) -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
