Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Sat, Aug 21 at 4:13, Orvar Korvar wrote: And by the way: Wasn't there a comment of Linus Torvals recently that people shound move their low-quality code into the codebase ??? ;) Anyone knows the link? Good against the Linux fanboys. :o) Can't find the original reference, but I believe he was arguing that by moving code into the kernel and marking as experimental, it's more likely to be tested and have the bugs worked out, than if it forever lives as patchsets. Given the test environment, can't say I can argue against that point of view. -- Eric D. Mudama edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Eric D. Mudama On Sat, Aug 21 at 4:13, Orvar Korvar wrote: And by the way: Wasn't there a comment of Linus Torvals recently that people shound move their low-quality code into the codebase ??? ;) Anyone knows the link? Good against the Linux fanboys. :o) Can't find the original reference, but I believe he was arguing that by moving code into the kernel and marking as experimental, it's more likely to be tested and have the bugs worked out, than if it forever lives as patchsets. Given the test environment, can't say I can argue against that point of view. Besides defending the point of view (checkin experimental changes to an experimental area, to accelerate code review) ... which seems like a fair point of view ... Who finds it necessary to have ammunition against linux fanboys? Linux is good in its own way. You got something against linux? Just converse on the points of merit, and both you and they will reach the best conclusions you can, rather than pushing an agenda or encouraging unnecessary bias. Each OS is better in its own way. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
And by the way: Wasn't there a comment of Linus Torvals recently that people shound move their low-quality code into the codebase ??? ;) Anyone knows the link? Good against the Linux fanboys. :o) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Linder, Doug there are an awful lot of places that actively DO NOT want the latest and greatest, and for good reason. Agreed. Latest-greatest has its place, which is not 24/7 must-stay-up core servers. Each OS - sol10 vs osol (or more appropriately now ... something like fedora vs rhel) Each OS has its place. Each one satisfies different requirements. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Erik Trimble wrote: While there were certainly a few folks who ran OpenSolaris in production (who absolutely needed the new features and couldn't wait until they made it to Solaris 10), Or those features that simply were never going to be backported to S10, particularly the in-kernel CIFS server... We were planning on migrating from S10 to OpenSolaris, and that was one of the major reasons. If OpenSolaris 3/2010 had actually been released, we might have even been there now... -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | hen...@csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 8/18/10 3:58 PM -0400 Linder, Doug wrote: Erik Trimble wrote: That said, stability vs new features has NOTHING to do with the OSS development model. It has everything to do with the RELEASE model. [...] All that said, using the OSS model for actual *development* of an Operating System is considerably superior to using a closed model. For reasons I outlined previously in a post to opensolaris-discuss. I didn't mean to imply there was anything wrong with the OSS release-early-and-often model. I also didn't mean to imply Solaris was creaky or wrong or bad compared to OpenSolaris. It has different requirements. But I did mean that folks who want the latest and greatest are not the same folks that want stability. So people using OpenSolaris are not the same people using Solaris. (Of course there are shops where both are used to different ends, but one is not a gateway to the other.) I agree with Erik, there is an upgrade path, but that's just the natural incorporation of OpenSolaris features into Solaris (same as existed before, just OpenSolaris wasn't something available publicly and widely). That's not the same as migrating to OpenSolaris. When today's features are in Solaris, OpenSolaris will have newer shinier features. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 9:13 AM, David Magda dma...@ee.ryerson.ca wrote: On Aug 14, 2010, at 19:39, Kevin Walker wrote: I once watched a video interview with Larry from Oracle, this ass rambled on about how he hates cloud computing and that everyone was getting into cloud computing and in his opinion no one understood cloud computing, apart from him... :-| If this is the video you're talking about, I think you misinterpreted what he meant: Cloud computing is not only the future of computing, but it is the present, and the entire past of computing is all cloud. [...] All it is is a computer connected to a network. What do you think Google runs on? Do you think they run on water vapour? It's databases, and operating systems, and memory, and microprocessors, and the Internet. And all of a sudden it's none of that, it's the cloud. [...] All the cloud is, is computers on a network, in terms of technology. In terms of business model, you can say it's rental. All SalesForce.com was, before they were cloud computing, was software-as-a-service, and then they became cloud computing. [...] Our industry is so bizarre: they change a term and think they invented technology. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmrxN3GWHpM#t=45m I don't see any inaccurate in what said. Indeed; even waaay before the SaaSillyness, they were know as service bureaus: http://drcoddwasright.blogspot.com/2009/07/cloud-lucy-in-sky-with-razorblades.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
Fedora is a great beta test arena for what eventually becomes a commercial Enterprise offering. OpenSolaris was the Solaris equivalent. Losing the free bleeding edge testing community will no doubt impact on the Solaris code quality. I think code quality has nothing to do with open-sourcing or not ... it has something to do with development processes. And by the way: Wasn't there a comment of Linus Torvals recently that people shound move their low-quality code into the codebase ??? ;) -- ORACLE Joerg Moellenkamp | Sales Consultant Phone: +49 40 251523-460 | Mobile: +49 172 8318433 Oracle Hardware Presales - Nord ORACLE Deutschland B.V. Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603 Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Rijnzathe 6, 3454PV De Meern, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
I had already begun the process of migrating my 134 boxes over to Nexenta before Oracle's cunning plans became known. This just reaffirms my decision. Us too. :) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Sunday 15 August 2010 11:56:22 Joerg Moellenkamp wrote: And by the way: Wasn't there a comment of Linus Torvals recently that people shound move their low-quality code into the codebase ??? ;) Yeah, those codes should be put into the staging part of the codebase, so that (more) people can work on it to insufficient quality code with a great idea behind better until it meets the quality of the mainline kernel. As you rightly pointed out, this is a development model which works nicely with open source in an open environment where developers are all around the globe and have a largely varying programming skill. I don't think that something like this would work in a (possibly much smaller) corporate environment/software engineering group. That said, I think it's actually a very good thing, to have this opportunity to push low-quality/non-conforming software into a controlled environment for polishing. Cheers Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Aug 14, 2010, at 19:39, Kevin Walker wrote: I once watched a video interview with Larry from Oracle, this ass rambled on about how he hates cloud computing and that everyone was getting into cloud computing and in his opinion no one understood cloud computing, apart from him... :-| If this is the video you're talking about, I think you misinterpreted what he meant: Cloud computing is not only the future of computing, but it is the present, and the entire past of computing is all cloud. [...] All it is is a computer connected to a network. What do you think Google runs on? Do you think they run on water vapour? It's databases, and operating systems, and memory, and microprocessors, and the Internet. And all of a sudden it's none of that, it's the cloud. [...] All the cloud is, is computers on a network, in terms of technology. In terms of business model, you can say it's rental. All SalesForce.com was, before they were cloud computing, was software- as-a-service, and then they became cloud computing. [...] Our industry is so bizarre: they change a term and think they invented technology. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmrxN3GWHpM#t=45m I don't see any inaccurate in what said. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 07:38 -0700, Richard Jahnel wrote: FWIW I'm making a significant bet that Nexenta plus Illumos will be the future for the space in which I operate. I had already begun the process of migrating my 134 boxes over to Nexenta before Oracle's cunning plans became known. This just reaffirms my decision. It warms my heart to hear you say that. :-) After all, I made a similar bet with my career. :-) - Garrett ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
To be fair, he did talk some sense about how everyone was claiming to have a product that was cloud computing, but I still don't like Oracle. With there current Java Patent war with Google and now this with OpenSolaris, it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. Will this affect ZFS being used in FreeBSD? On 15 August 2010 15:13, David Magda dma...@ee.ryerson.ca wrote: On Aug 14, 2010, at 19:39, Kevin Walker wrote: I once watched a video interview with Larry from Oracle, this ass rambled on about how he hates cloud computing and that everyone was getting into cloud computing and in his opinion no one understood cloud computing, apart from him... :-| If this is the video you're talking about, I think you misinterpreted what he meant: Cloud computing is not only the future of computing, but it is the present, and the entire past of computing is all cloud. [...] All it is is a computer connected to a network. What do you think Google runs on? Do you think they run on water vapour? It's databases, and operating systems, and memory, and microprocessors, and the Internet. And all of a sudden it's none of that, it's the cloud. [...] All the cloud is, is computers on a network, in terms of technology. In terms of business model, you can say it's rental. All SalesForce.com was, before they were cloud computing, was software-as-a-service, and then they became cloud computing. [...] Our industry is so bizarre: they change a term and think they invented technology. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmrxN3GWHpM#t=45m I don't see any inaccurate in what said. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 8/14/10 10:18 PM -0700 Richard Elling wrote: On Aug 13, 2010, at 7:06 PM, Frank Cusack wrote: Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? Markets dictate behaviour. Oracle has clearly stated their goal of focusing the Sun-acquired assets at the Fortune-500 market. Nexenta has a different market -- the rest of the world. There is plenty of room for both to be successful. -- richard Great point. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
Mike M the.li...@mgm51.com wrote: Think: strategic business advantage. Oracle are not stupid, they recognize a jewel when they see one. Too bad that they decided to throw it into acid. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 8/13/10 8:56 PM -0600 Eric D. Mudama wrote: On Fri, Aug 13 at 19:06, Frank Cusack wrote: Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? These distributions are, in theory, the gateway drug where people can experiment inexpensively to try out new technologies (ZFS, dtrace, crossbow, comstar, etc.) and eventually step up to Oracle's big iron as their business grows. I've never understood how OpenSolaris was supposed to get you to Solaris. OpenSolaris is for enthusiasts and great great folks like Nexenta. Solaris lags so far behind it's not really an upgrade path. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 8/13/10 8:56 PM -0600 Eric D. Mudama wrote: On Fri, Aug 13 at 19:06, Frank Cusack wrote: Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? These distributions are, in theory, the gateway drug where people can experiment inexpensively to try out new technologies (ZFS, dtrace, crossbow, comstar, etc.) and eventually step up to Oracle's big iron as their business grows. I've never understood how OpenSolaris was supposed to get you to Solaris. OpenSolaris is for enthusiasts and great great folks like Nexenta. Solaris lags so far behind it's not really an upgrade path. Fedora is a great beta test arena for what eventually becomes a commercial Enterprise offering. OpenSolaris was the Solaris equivalent. Losing the free bleeding edge testing community will no doubt impact on the Solaris code quality. It is now even more likely Solaris will revert to it's niche on SPARC over the next few years. Mark. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
I once watched a video interview with Larry from Oracle, this ass rambled on about how he hates cloud computing and that everyone was getting into cloud computing and in his opinion no one understood cloud computing, apart from him... :-| From that day on I felt enlightened about Oracle and how they want do business; they are run by a CEO who is narrow minded and clearly doesn't understand Open Source or cloud computing and Oracle are very, very greedy... I only hope that OpenSolaris can live on the Illumos project and assist great projects such as Nexentastor. http://www.illumos.org/ K On 15 August 2010 00:02, Mark Bennett mark.benn...@public.co.nz wrote: On 8/13/10 8:56 PM -0600 Eric D. Mudama wrote: On Fri, Aug 13 at 19:06, Frank Cusack wrote: Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? These distributions are, in theory, the gateway drug where people can experiment inexpensively to try out new technologies (ZFS, dtrace, crossbow, comstar, etc.) and eventually step up to Oracle's big iron as their business grows. I've never understood how OpenSolaris was supposed to get you to Solaris. OpenSolaris is for enthusiasts and great great folks like Nexenta. Solaris lags so far behind it's not really an upgrade path. Fedora is a great beta test arena for what eventually becomes a commercial Enterprise offering. OpenSolaris was the Solaris equivalent. Losing the free bleeding edge testing community will no doubt impact on the Solaris code quality. It is now even more likely Solaris will revert to it's niche on SPARC over the next few years. Mark. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010, Mark Bennett wrote: It is now even more likely Solaris will revert to it's niche on SPARC over the next few years. The probability of a retreat to SPARC direction is virtually zero. SPARC offers advantages in scalability, but its straight-line performance pales compared to current Intel and AMD CPUs. There is little indication that Oracle will change this situation. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 8/15/10 12:39 AM +0100 Kevin Walker wrote: and Oracle are very, very greedy... Let's not get all soft about OpenSolaris now ... all public companies are very, very greedy. They exist solely to make money. It's awesome that they make things that are useful, but it's just a way to meet the main objective: make money and lots of it. In fact, as much as they possibly can. Sun didn't open source Solaris out of the goodness of its heart or some misguided CSR program. They did it because they were desperate. Sun's business plan happened to be helped along by open sourcing Solaris, but that doesn't make Sun less greedy. Oracle: very, very greedy Apple: very, very greedy Microsoft: very, very greedy Sun: [was] very, very greedy (just not good at it) Fortune 1000: very, very greedy ... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Aug 13, 2010, at 7:06 PM, Frank Cusack wrote: Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? Markets dictate behaviour. Oracle has clearly stated their goal of focusing the Sun-acquired assets at the Fortune-500 market. Nexenta has a different market -- the rest of the world. There is plenty of room for both to be successful. -- richard -- Richard Elling rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 Enterprise class storage for everyone www.nexenta.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
If this information is correct, http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=133043 further development of ZFS will take place behind closed doors. Opensolaris will become the internal development version of Solaris with no public distributions. The community has been abandoned. -- -Gary Mills--Unix Group--Computer and Network Services- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 13-8-2010 22:43, Gary Mills wrote: If this information is correct, http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=133043 further development of ZFS will take place behind closed doors. Opensolaris will become the internal development version of Solaris with no public distributions. The community has been abandoned. True and very sad. I changed my LAN back to FreeBSD. It does not even come close to OpenSolaris but it is stable and it is developed and open. And it (still) has ZFS support. I wonder for how long.. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
Gary Mills wrote: If this information is correct, http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=133043 further development of ZFS will take place behind closed doors. Opensolaris will become the internal development version of Solaris with no public distributions. The community has been abandoned. It was a community of system administrators and nearly no developers. While this may make big news the real impact is probably pretty small. Source code updates will get tossed over the fence and developer partners (Intel) will still have access to onnv-gate. In a way i see this as a very good thing. It will not *force* the existing (small) community of companies and developers to band together to actually work together. From there the real open source momentum can happen instead of everyone depending on Sun/Oracle to give them a free lunch. The first step that I've been adamant about is making it easier for developers to play and get their hands on it.. If we can enable that it'll swing things around regardless of what mega-corp does or doesn't do... Just my 0.02$ ./C ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:01:07PM -0700, C. Bergström wrote: Gary Mills wrote: If this information is correct, http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=133043 further development of ZFS will take place behind closed doors. Opensolaris will become the internal development version of Solaris with no public distributions. The community has been abandoned. It was a community of system administrators and nearly no developers. While this may make big news the real impact is probably pretty small. Source code updates will get tossed over the fence and developer partners (Intel) will still have access to onnv-gate. I'm interested to see how this plays out in actuality. It almost sounded like source code wouldn't necessarily be shared until major release were made... which would obviously make it hard for third party ZFS vendors to keep up in the interim. I guess most of this is still hear-say at this point, but if you've read somewhere where Oracle has stated they plan to continuously share source code and updates throughout their development processes (not just at release time), it'd be good to see... In a way i see this as a very good thing. It will not *force* the existing (small) community of companies and developers to band together to actually work together. From there the real open source momentum can happen instead of everyone depending on Sun/Oracle to give them a free lunch. The first step that I've been adamant about is making it easier for developers to play and get their hands on it.. If we can enable that it'll swing things around regardless of what mega-corp does or doesn't do... Just my 0.02$ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Ray Van Dolson wrote: I'm interested to see how this plays out in actuality. It almost sounded like source code wouldn't necessarily be shared until major release were made... which would obviously make it hard for third party ZFS vendors to keep up in the interim. You are right that this internal document does not describe when source would be released. Perhaps it might be released after every update release, or it might be released every seven years. My own feeling is that existing engineers inherited from Sun may have some strong personal feelings about this and may feel betrayed if Oracle (again) does not do what it said it was going to do. Betrayed engineers may jump ship for the competition. High caliber engineers are very difficult to obtain. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 8/14/10 4:01 AM +0700 C. Bergström wrote: Gary Mills wrote: If this information is correct, http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=133043 further development of ZFS will take place behind closed doors. Opensolaris will become the internal development version of Solaris with no public distributions. The community has been abandoned. It was a community of system administrators and nearly no developers. While this may make big news the real impact is probably pretty small. I agree! Source code updates will get tossed over the fence and developer partners (Intel) will still have access to onnv-gate. In a way i see this as a very good thing. It will not *force* the ^^^ You must have meant now? existing (small) community of companies and developers to band together to actually work together. From there the real open source momentum can happen instead of everyone depending on Sun/Oracle to give them a free lunch. The first step that I've been adamant about is making it easier for developers to play and get their hands on it.. If we can enable that it'll swing things around regardless of what mega-corp does or doesn't do... Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? -frank ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On Fri, Aug 13 at 19:06, Frank Cusack wrote: Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? These distributions are, in theory, the gateway drug where people can experiment inexpensively to try out new technologies (ZFS, dtrace, crossbow, comstar, etc.) and eventually step up to Oracle's big iron as their business grows. --eric -- Eric D. Mudama edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS development moving behind closed doors
On 8/13/2010 at 8:56 PM Eric D. Mudama wrote: |On Fri, Aug 13 at 19:06, Frank Cusack wrote: |Interesting POV, and I agree. Most of the many distributions of |OpenSolaris had very little value-add. Nexenta was the most interesting |and why should Oracle enable them to build a business at their expense? | |These distributions are, in theory, the gateway drug where people |can experiment inexpensively to try out new technologies (ZFS, dtrace, |crossbow, comstar, etc.) and eventually step up to Oracle's big iron |as their business grows. = Think: strategic business advantage. Oracle are not stupid, they recognize a jewel when they see one. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
