On 11/13/2007 7:28 PM, Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote: > On Nov 13, 2007 11:23 PM, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote: >> Impedance mismatch alert! >> >> >> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:36:19PM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote: >> > ... Having the ability for all distributions to pull from >> > the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like the most >> ideal >> > way to share our work. >> >> and >> >> > Keith M Wesolowski wrote: >> > A consequence of this approach is that what gets built can't depend on >> > *anything* about the build system, and the tools *must* completely >> > cleanse the environment. >> >> Glynn and I are talking about a BINARY Repository of pre-built packages. >> >> Keith seems to be focused on a SOURCE CODE Repository. >> > a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a > package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable > > nacho If a given distribution didn't use the same packaging system would that distribution be eliminating the possibility of using the thousands (eventually) of packages that will be created for IPS? And how many packaging systems does anyone really think that commercial ISVs and OSS communities will support for an OpenSolaris derivative? I suggest less than two. If Solaris Next will use IPS I think the choice is clear.
Marty
