On Tue, 22 May 2007, James Carlson wrote:
...
The implication of what Ian has been suggesting is that this new
distribution will essentially have Major release binding. All options
are open, and what we had thought of as legacy interfaces preserved
for compatibility (such as default "df" output) are up for grabs. The
whole point to having this extra distribution -- as best I can tell
from the discussion so far -- is to allow for incompatible but "Linux
friendly" changes.
...
Dear Ian and opensolaris-discuss,
I agree with James. That does seem to be the whole point of having this
extra distribution. Which raises the other source of turmoil in these
discussions: Context.
A better context for these discussions, I think, is one that starts with
case 2007/047 (plus its offspring) as a common reference on which to build
the discussion. Reason being, the *whole point* of that case was "Linux
friendly changes" for Nevada. That's a *perfect* reference point on which
to build a discussion about non-Nevada ways to attack the problem (e.g.
incompatible Linux friendly changes done via a separate distro).
Which brings me to "broken record" time again: As people keep pointing out
on this list: _This list_ is a bad place to hold important discussions. In
this caes, if Linux friendly changes is the pillar of Indiana, lets please
move the discussion to a place where all the people who care about that are
sure to be watching (that place is _definitely_ not here).
Eric
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
