> From: [email protected] [mailto:opensolaris- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Milkowski > > Oracle didn't deliver > OSOL within the time frame they publicly stated and there is no > explanation or any communication about it whatsoever. There might be > valid technical issues, or maybe even business reasons, or strategic > reason... The problem is the total silence about it and even if for > some > reason they can't go into details
There is no problem. "It is not the spoon that bends, it is only you." This is free software we're talking about. If you want support, pay for solaris 10. If you are not worried about support, it doesn't matter if the thing you're using is called "osol dev134" or "osol 2010.06" or any other name. I know for several months, I have recommended the latest developer build of osol, as long as you're not using it in production. But if you *are* using it in production, I recommend paying for sol10. (Better yet, sun hardware with sol10.) If there is any feature or bugfix you care about, which is present in osol, and not in sol10, open a support case. I know I have. And I know they were very responsive and helpful for me. In the end, the problem was solved without any patch, but getting them to release a patch was certainly one of the options on the table while the problem persisted. I don't know or understand why so many free-users developed such concrete expectations and demands of openness and rapid releases cycles, or an expectation to stick to schedule. Yes, some other OSes or products do have faster release cycles (or better consistency sticking to their stated schedule) but certainly not all. I love in particular, the examples of RHEL6, because well over a year ago, I advised my clients we need to migrate from RHEL4 to RHEL5, to avoid the EOL on RHEL4. RHEL6 is a commercial product with support, used in production, and osol is free. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
