* Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-01 07:52]:
> > Nobody likes the closed_bins; but it's not under our
> > control....
> 
> I think what's most frustrating about the closed_bins is that we don't
> know *why* in some cases. It would be helpful if there were a status
> list for the closed_bins that indicated what items would never be
> available (due to 3rd party or something generic like that as reason),
> which have a chance of being available at some unknown date (under
> review), and which items will be available at some unknown date (in
> process).
> 
> That would go a long way to silencing critics. If we *knew* that you
> actually couldn't release an item ever because it was completely out
> of "SUN's hands" so to speak; that might be a motivation for people to
> start working on something. At the moment, we have some vague notion
> that some things are "out of our control" but we don't know who the
> group of people the comprise "our" is, and we don't know if that means
> *forever*.
> 
> I apologise if this information is somewhere obvious and I've missed
> it.
> 
> Thankfully though, we finally *know* that libc_i18n is completely out
> of "SUN's hands" so to speak. It indeed sounds like a great
> opportunity for a community project.

  If a contract carries terms of confidentiality or non-disclosure, then
  the signatories can't tell a third party the specific details you
  seek.

  I suppose my question is:  why not just assume that a non-SMI-led
  effort to provide an OSS replacement for each and every closed binary
  is needed, and then order them by interest, necessity, or some other
  priority?  For each consolidation publishing closed binaries, you have
  a list.  Start the projects to reduce the reliance or inclusion of
  encumbered components.

  As a non-lib example, for instance, it's been suggested that ON be
  scrubbed of its ksh88+smi scripts--replaced with tested ksh93-based
  versions.  This means that distributions would be less affected by
  restrictions around ksh88+smi binary distribution.  (That's a shell
  scripting project, which probably has the opportunity to also look at
  identifying common shell scripting style and practice for ON or other
  consolidations (if the hypothetical project team were interested).)

  Similar cases can be made for other encumbered components.

  - Stephen

-- 
Stephen Hahn, PhD  Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to