[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Is it possible to extend that to 12 months, please ? > >Some of the larger projects may have to wait longer for their inclusion > >into OS/Net and IMO it may be bad if the original B[1-9][1-9] build > >tools, sources etc. go away shortly before the putback just because > >they're slightly over the six-month barrier... > > I don't understand that requirement. Any project needs to be build > against the latest bits prior to putback. So keeping exceedingly stale > bits does not help them in anyway.
It depends on what you are working on. People may want to remain with their "older" version as long as possible because an "update" costs significant time, including such "small" items like installing a machine from scratch with a new version of OpenSolaris. Within a suiteable environment with multiple machines (+ Jumpstart etc.) this is easy and painless - but for contributors with less infratructure (and/or less experience) this can take significant time, sometimes half a day, a day or even much longer if problems with the hardware arise. It may not help as the update to the newest version is unavoidable prior putback but longer-running projects may want to stay with one version for a longer period and update only when it is really _neccesary_ and not just because it's "cool". Think about students, pupils, simple computer enthusiast and non-IT people - those are the main victims of killing off the older versions... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
