> Note that the distribution package into which WebStack is going may
> answer your question
>
> -- for example
>
> for SXDE, there is probably no need to even include 64-bit versions of
> software when a 32-bit version is included, because it is not needed and
> having two versions of the same product will cause confusion (as a
> related issue, there is already much confusion since webstack supplies
> Apache2, yet Solaris already bundles Apache{1} and running both with
> default ports would cause a conflict and error).
>
> This is because SXDE is intended for desktop, primarily single-user
> evaluation, by programmers and web developers, using a desktop-class
> workstation, where what's important is: simplicity, ease of use,
> negligible learning curve by non-solaris people, and quick user success
> in evaluation and pilot projects. SXDE is not intended for use in data
> centers, for production deployment, or by enterprise sysadmins, where
> scalability and performance are important.
Although SXDE and Project Indiana are initially aimed at the developer,
it's important to realize that the source base and consolidations that
made up SXDE (actually Nevada) and the future version of Solaris aimed
at the *deployer* are one and the same. So while phasing delivery of
the 64-bit components might be OK, the content changes that go into
"Nevada" today are the basis of SXDE, Indiana and Solaris Next.
dsc
