David J. Orman writes: > Is it or is it not true that @sun people contribute the majority of > the code that is OSOL? I'm pretty sure my comment was fair, and in > NO way was it intended as negative/insulting/etc. I have upmost > respect for Sun, and I am *trusting* Sun in their intent. This > should be viewed as positive.
It's true ... but it also seems sort of beside the point. Take a look at the makeup of the CAB and then decide. > > We've had many official declarations about our intent and direction > > from the highest levels of the company. If you're not moved by those, > > then I doubt that anyone here can help. > > Yes, I realize that, but you (again, not attempting to be > inflamitory, but you bring this up) stated various things in earlier > emails that led me to believe maybe there had been a shift. No, there's no "shift" here. > It could > completely have been my *incorrect* interpretation of your > words. I'm not putting blame nor pointing fingers. I'm simply > saying, I saw things said that made me believe there was something > different going on than what I had heard "officially" prior, and I > was needing clarification (again, obviously other people questioning > things too, they responded!) I think there must be a misinterpretation here. > I understand that now, and that's what I asked in my previous mail > directed at you. You replied I was incorrect, OSOL is not SX, is not > Solaris. Right, and that's still true. Open Solaris is _not_ Sun Solaris. It is where we (Sun) have, keep, maintain, and develop the source code that (at least in part) _becomes_ Solaris. And also BeleniX and several other products. Big difference. > It is, it's the source/upstream/whatever term you want to call it, > but it is SX/Solaris (albiet those releases are delayed.) To me, it's like saying that "www.kernel.org" is RedHat. Really? How is that true? Sure, RedHat uses (some of) those bits to make their distribution. Sure, if you get something into www.kernel.org, RedHat may well pick it up and use it. But that doesn't make them the same thing. One is the source base, and the other is a distribution -- a product. > I'm not > saying OSOL can only be used for those, obviously other distros have > sprung up and used OSOL as their basis. Just OSOL in it's stock > form, as a project, is what becomes SX and is what becomes > Solaris. That part's correct. > This has been confirmed, and I am clear on things now. Your > previous mail to me (at least through my interpretation) told me I > was incorrect in this type of thinking. It's still incorrect to say that the source repository is the same thing as the product. The distinction is important because there may well be lots of products (distributions) that are based on the same source, and yet are intentionally *NOT* the same. -- James Carlson, KISS Network <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
