Glynn Foster wrote:
...
It's not that I disagree [I think I'm very much in agreement], but I'm
just wondering how best to go about this. For example, arguably Nexenta
have already done their own thing, packaged software, using different
tools and created their own distribution. ShilliX mostly does the same,
though admittedly may follow this community a bit closer with the
ultimate goal of creating a compatible OpenSolaris based distribution.
Where's the benefit? Is it only 'Foo version X should be on Solaris 11'?
I think these are good questions; I'd be interested to hear what the
principals of those projects think about their relationship to these
latest community proposals.
...
I'd probably vote for just 'Packaging', but I also wonder if this should
really be rolled into Dave's 'Installation and packaging' community
proposal.
I think the proposal that we've put forth is about both tools and
practices for managing the software lifecycle. I can sort of twist
Keith's original paragraph around to make it fit, but I'm not sure that
the end result achieves the intent.
...
[1] And I have a real fear that we're creating too many disjointed
communities, when we really need to build some initial mass and
momentum purposely with fewer communities.
I understand this, it's been on my mind, too.
Dave
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
