> I'm wondering, what thought has anyone seriously
> given to the notion of 
> "shrinking" ON?
> 
> It seems like anytime anyone has anything to putback
> that doesn't fall 
> into SFW, JDS, or X11, they stick it into ON.
> 
> This might not be such a terrible idea, except that
> ON has gotten 
> really, really big.  I have *got* to believe that the
> amount of time 
> wasted by engineers waiting for simple things like
> bringover, putback, 
> and file copies is significant, particularly taken
> cumulatively.
> 
> And, it seems like a *lot* of ON doesn't have any
> natural reason to be 
> in ON, other than historical reason, or lack of any
> better place to put 
> it.  For example, the recent filebench integration.
>  Or perl 5.6.1.  Or 
> endmail.  Or pretty much the entire printing
> subsystem.  Or even the 
> libucb compatibility stuff.   I'm sure there's a lot
> more that could 
> easily be pared down.
> 
> My point is, maybe we should consider a separate
> consolidation, 
> "utility" or somesuch, for portions of ON that are
> not actually required 
> to build or boot ON.  I'd hazard a guess that this
> would help out most 
> folks who work in ON a great deal -- regardless of
> whether their project 
> was in ON or the new consolidation.  (I mean come on,
> do the folks 
> working on "vi" really need or a want a copy of the
> entire kernel and 
> all the drivers?  Or even a copy of libc?)
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised to learn that X11 or JDS or
> SFW have similar 
> concerns.  Unbounded growth of consolidations is
> probably painful 
> everywhere.  Granted, someday hopefully we'll get
> better tools (hg), but 
> even then, you have to populate an initial tree to
> start working, so a 
> smaller consolidation is still beneficial.

How about an additional criteria for what's eligible to be moved out:
no consolidation private interfaces used, nor any project private ones
unless the whole "project" is moved out?  That way, there aren't a bunch
of new contracts needed, nor increased risks of out-of-sync changes.
 
 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code

Reply via email to