On Jan 4, 2008 4:56 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote: > > > Compatibility must be useful to be valuable, compatibility with > > unfinalised OpenSolaris distributions isn't very useful, while > > compatibility with Solaris is extremely useful given ISV support. > > Fine, then "Solaris Express" behavior cannot create facts as this is > an unfinalized distribution. > > > As such, it makes sense for Sun to be the primary definer of compatibility. > > Compatibility should be defined by the people who contribute ideas and code > and > who do things first, not by Sun unless Solaris is not really open.
Considering Sun has over 1,000 people that "contribute ideas and code and who do things first" I'd say they have the lion's share of right to determine and define compatibility. Being open does not mean the community gets to dictate what will happen to Sun. It means that the Sun, as part of the community, will work with others to define compatibility. If someone in the community does not agree, that does not give them the right to claim that things aren't open just because things don't happen their way. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
