>It appears to me that item #2 can be broken down further. The idea of >having a reference distribution is totally different from the >requirement to be compatible.
Right; AFAIK distributions like "Nexenta" would not fall under the "compatible" definition and that would be a shame. What I would like a reference distribution to be is a starting point for folks who want to build their own distribution; those initial steps are likely to be the hardest. Being able to do something as simple as "make opensolaris.iso" which would give you a *reference* distribution would be extremely worthwhile; it lowers the barrier to entry for those who want to play at that level. (Including, of course, instructions on how to add stuff, etc) >There is some benefit from compatibility guarantees, as the binary >compatibility guarantee in *Solaris* (not the Open one) has shown. Indeed, if we want *compatible*, I think you would hold *Solaris Nevada* as the gold standard for compatibility. Casper _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
