On Dec 3, 2007 2:12 PM, Brian Utterback <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Shawn Walker wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007 12:20 PM, Patrick Ale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Is Sun even sure it's self what will do what and what will replace what? I > >> just get an email from somebody of this list saying Indiana will replace > >> SXCE and will be the basis for Solaris 11. Which is ff-ing funny since > >> people who work at Sun (and highly placed functions) assured me less than > >> four weeks ago that SXCE would stay around, that they needed the community > >> to do what they are doing now and how they cant do things with out them and > >> that SXCE would be the basis for Solaris 11 and Indiana was merrely a > >> product derived from SXCE. > > > > It is true according to other high ranking folks at Sun. The plan is > > to eventually phase out SXCE and replace it with Indiana according to > > them. > > > > This was discussed at the OpenSolaris Developer's Summit. > > > > There was some confusion internally, but I believe that it has been > resolved. SXCE is not going away any time soon. It serves several > functions, one of which is as a beta test version of the next > Solaris release. As long as the next marketing release of Solaris > contains proprietary bits (i.e. the closed branch) that Sun wants > to be available for testing, then SXCE must continue.
There must still be confusion then. The proprietary bits part makes sense, but I expect SXCE at least to become a derivative of Indiana eventually then considering it wouldn't make great financial and resource sense to duplicate efforts (I suspect anyway). -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
