On Jan 4, 2008 9:39 AM, Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersmith at sun.com> wrote: > Shawn Walker wrote: > > On Jan 4, 2008 7:16 AM, <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote: > >> Nevada. (Indiana, giving an incompatible user experience and scripting > >> experience is not such a release even if it aspires to be one) > > > > It is disingenuous at best to make such a claim when Indiana has made > > no such claim that it is, as of yet, trying to be such a compatible > > distribution. > > But it has been offered as the base distro against which others will be > judged for compatibility if they are to use the OpenSolaris name, so > discussing it's compatibility with other distros is an important topic, > even if only to decide in the end that we know what we're getting from it.
I don't think Indiana itself, in its present form, has been offered for compatibility evaluation. I certainly haven't seen any statements from Indiana project members to indicate such. Rather, an idea that there would be a single OpenSolaris reference distribution and that eventually, Indiana would represent it, is what has been offered. Regardless, my issue is that any feedback regarding Indiana should be provided to the project. Subtle little snipes at or indications that "Indiana will doom us all!" (which is what claims about compatibility amount to at this point) is really quite unfair. -- 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
