On Mon, 5 May 2008, James Carlson wrote: > I mostly agree with that. I don't envy the owner of that repository > -- he's got a tough row to hoe in terms of hosting content of unknown > and possibly legally risky origin -- but I don't think the existence > of such a place has much to do with this particular case.
Exactly, and that is the point. Not only does this relieve the burden of all the Sun process to getting a package into a repository, but it removes the liability from Sun. This seems like a win-win. I think there must be some type of qualification for a package, to submit it, but I don't want any of the Sun process to obstruct anything, especially like Alpine. We should make sure that someone in the community does in fact provide some package to the Alpine page also. In that sense maybe a SysVR4 package is it. > The fact that they haven't integrated is unlikely to be due to the ARC > (after all, "closed" means the review is done and "approved" means it > was successful), but you really can't say much about it other than > that. As a community member, why should I care. Nothing to stop everyone from having their own repository. Maybe I should do that and just start one of my own. > In some instances, the original project team got interrupted by > higher-priority work. In other cases the team ran into serious > problems with the software itself. I'm sure there are valid reasons, even if his dog ate the sources. The fact is that it was filed 7 months ago and is not integrated. > Asserting that a new repository will somehow cover for project teams > taking a long time to deliver is just not reasonable. No, that is not it at all. -- Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
