On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Paul Gress <pgr...@optonline.net> wrote: > On 04/14/10 10:56 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > Chad Welsh wrote: > > > So, when and who might be the first step/person to make this happen to > protect what has been done so far? > > > What would your fork do differently than the main project, besides have > almost > no developers working on it, since all the Oracle-paid developers would > still be > working on the original OpenSolaris? > > It would get a release out. I'm still using b134 since 03/09/2010. > > Would you even have enough developers > to keep up with the overhead of merging in all the changes Oracle developers > are pushing to the main OpenSolaris gates every day? > > > > If their pushing to the main OpenSolaris gates every day, why hasn't > anything been released. Why cannot I upgrade to b135, b136 or b137? > Everyone is getting edgy. If Oracle won't publish a binary, Dennis is > testing what it would take to do this effort himself. > > > If what you really want is a new distro that's not in Oracle's control, what > would differentiate your distro from the existing ones, and why would it > make > sense to start another instead of joining one of the existing groups to work > on theirs? > > > > I don't think he wants to start a new distro, he's looking to publish b137. > > > > Paul
Mmh, are you so sure? Maybe the label would be upgraded to reflect a ^new^ version. But I doubt many would be able to even remotely keep up with what Sun/Oracle is contributing in real diffs. %martin bochnig _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
