2009/3/31 Alan Coopersmith <Alan.Coopersmith at sun.com>: > C. Bergstr?m wrote: >> Alan Coopersmith wrote: >>> C. Bergstr?m wrote: >>>> The real goal here is to build a fully open source distro based on >>>> OpenSolaris technology. >>> >>> That is *your* goal, but I can't say for certain that is the goal of >>> everyone involved in the OpenSolaris community. ? For instance, while >>> I wish they'd open source it, I'm not going to say the nvidia driver >>> should be blocked and nvidia users not able to use 3D acceleration >>> because their driver sources are closed. >> Wait a second here.. Solaris has been around for many years as core >> *server* OS. > > That's wrong, but also irrelevant. ? If you want to pretend Solaris is > for servers only, then pretend I said "HW RAID drivers" or "NIC drivers" > or "service processor management software" or any other software for some > other server-utilized hardware that's closed source and the vendor isn't > opening. > >> Since when did nvidia drivers with 3D acceleration become >> part of the core features that the community wants/needs? > > Again, irrelevant - the constitution doesn't say "all core features of a > server OS", but "all software produced by the OpenSolaris community."
I would have to agree with Mr. Bergstr?m on this. Linux, and BSD distros all "support" closed source drivers. (Even Debian). That doesn't mean they aren't open source operating systems. (Because the community/project isn't releasing closed source code). The "OpenSolaris Project" was formed to be the open source development branch for Solaris. The OpenSolaris Community was initially the group of individuals that signed up to contribute to this open source Project. Sun, and other hardware vendors may continue to produce closed source software, but I can't imagine an open source project like OpenSolaris producing closed source software by choice. Is the OpenSolaris community producing Nvidia, HW RAID and and service processor management software? I don't think so. Hardware vendors are. And they are producing them outside of the bounds of the community. For something to be an OpenSolaris project, as far as I understand the rules, it needs to be open source. (Under an appropriate OSI approved license). The big problem isn't drivers. It's that OpenSolaris still has core, non-driver components that are closed source. I think many in the community would agree that this is a bug in the code that should be fixed. Not something to be ignored, and certainly not something we should abandon our values to accommodate. (Think internationalization code, libc, etc.) Heck, why does the emancipation project even exist, if it's not important? Let's not forget the fact that we are talking about a proposed change to the constitution, to remove the requirement that all "community" software is open sourced. The justification for this change was that it was more appropriate to move the open source requirement to the charter. Based on what I am reading in this thread, I don't believe that this was the intention at all. Especially with attitudes that indicate that Sun doesn't really understand open source, and all the responsibilities that goes along with it. When I joined the community everyone told me yes, this is a bug we are fixing, we fully maintain a plan to open source everything... Now I am hearing differently? Even if Sun does change the charter, once that precedent has been set, who's to say that Sun won't just change it back, when market conditions dictate, or there is a change in leadership. Changing the charter is a very slippery slope we really should be *VERY*, *VERY* careful to avoid. (It was designed to be immutable, for good reason). The reality is, if Sun changes the charter, it is effectively disbanding the OpenSolaris community. I would say it is safe to say, that all software produced by the "OpenSolaris community" is still open source. However, "OpenSolaris the distro" is not produced by "the OpenSolaris Community" it is produced by Sun. It is a commercial Sun product that Sun sells support for. It is produced almost entirely by Sun employees, and/or by other people that are paid by Sun. (Not the community distro some of us envisioned two years ago). > Ignore the vast majority of OpenSolaris distro users all you want and > declare their wants/needs irrelevant to you, but you can't just claim > that software produced for them is not part of what at least some part > of the OpenSolaris community is doing. I suspect that many people in the community would not be part of the community if it wasn't for the early declaration that this is an open source project. It would be enlightening to have a special election, just asking the simple question, "Should OpenSolaris be fully open sourced?" >> In your response you compare ubuntu linux with opensolaris.. ?Is this >> really the target market for Sun? > > For the OpenSolaris distro? ? Ubuntu & Red Hat/Fedora are often listed > as examples of where Sun is taking the OS. ? That's a topic for another > forum though, not really related to governance/consitution/OGB policy. > >> What is the most important direction for OpenSolaris? >> ? ?a) server >> ? ?b) desktop >> ? ?c) developer workstation > > Why must there be only one? ? Why can't people work on more than one? > Why can't I work on desktop while you work on server and if we choose > to ignore each other or stay out of each other's way, live in harmony > in the OpenSolaris community? ? Must you shut down everyone who doesn't > have your exact goals and vision? > > Certainly the OpenSolaris distro is much more targeted at the desktop & > developer workstation in the current release - you can't seriously claim > to be a server-oriented OS when your only install method is a GUI installer > on a LiveCD. ? The upcoming 2009.06 release expands server support with the > Automated Install replacement for Jumpstart/network install, and more will > come in the future. OpenSolaris the distro, is the declared future of Sun's Solaris product line: Desktop, workstation, server, etc. What is important is that the code is freed. I think most of us can agree on that. (Or at least I did think that. Now I am starting to wonder). > -- > ? ? ? ?-Alan Coopersmith- ? ? ? ? ? alan.coopersmith at sun.com > ? ? ? ? Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering > > _______________________________________________ > ogb-discuss mailing list > ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss > -Brian P.S. - I hope, if there is another constitutional vote, a strong pro open source declaration remains a core component of whatever constitutional draft is proposed. -- - Brian Gupta New York City user groups calendar: http://nyc.brandorr.com/
