James Carlson wrote: > Roland Mainz writes: > > > According to the message from the community web site, there is no active > > > development on this product any more. While bug fixes, small > > > improvements and contributed patches may come. So I suggested to use > > > Committed level. If members think this is not proper, please let me know > > > and it will be fixed. > > > > Erm..."devils advocate" question: If Unison is no longer maintained... > > why should it be integrated into (Open)Solaris ? And how do other OSes > > (like Linux) handle the support issue (e.g. no upstream where they can > > send the bug reports to) ? > > No upstream change is (perversely enough) the good case: it means that > we can focus on getting the integration and maintenance right in > OpenSolaris,
Sarcastic comment of the day: Yeah... I remember how it was done "right" ([1]) in the case of /usr/bin/ksh ... =:-) [1]=Or better: It was done technically "right" (erm... in most cases) but other ksh88 codebases on other operating systems did evolve in different directions - the lack of a common maintainer or way to sync /usr/bin/ksh for the SystemV derivates made Solaris's /usr/bin/ksh a pain for those who want to develop software for Solaris... or even think that putting stuff into ~/.kshrc will behave the same way for all ksh88 versions. > and don't have to worry so much about any costs due to > forking from or contributing to the upstream ... because there > effectively isn't one. Groan... see above... just because the "head" (=maintainer, developer) is gone doesn't mean the rest of the body (= distributions, users) is dead, too. BTW: Do any Linux/BSD distributions apply any patches to "unison" ? ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
