Mike Gerdts writes: > As far as I know, only technical folks refer to the release as update > X. Marketing (including Sun's web site) will refer to it as Solaris N > M/YY (N = Solaris release, M = month of release, YY = year of > release). The first I knew, what I refer to as s10u4 was supposed to > be released as Solaris 10 7/07. Schedules slipped and it was renamed > Solaris 10 8/07. Schedules slipped a slight bit more and it came out > in September 2007 (9/07) but marketing didn't feel it worthwhile to > rename it. I'm pretty sure that Solaris 10 11/06 (update 3) was not > available until December, 2006.
You're essentially right on the money there. > Since I have no credible idea of when the next release of Solaris 10 > will come out (or if it will come out...) I refer to it as update 5. > My personal best guess is that it will be somewhere between March and > May of next year. We have exactly the same problem internally. I wish our marketing would use release numbers rather than dates, but they insist that dates are "easier" for customers (in some way that I neither understand nor can explain clearly). We've had the debate many times, and neither of us seems to convince the other. It doesn't seem worthwhile to bring it up again, at least to me. We end up needing to maintain Rosetta stone release number mappings, much in the same way we've got special lists of internal engineering project names to released hardware platform names. Plus some natural and on-going confusion when the mappings are misunderstood. > The real question I have is when will Solaris 11 come out? I've been > rather surprised at the number of features (aside from those marketed > at the Solaris 10 launch) have been backported to Solaris 10. I was > particularly surprised when I heard in the last couple of weeks that > ZFS root looks like it will make it into Solaris 10. (I'm not sure if > I ran across this on install-discuss, caiman-discuss, or one of the > installer conference calls.) As a rule, Solaris release planning is actually off-topic on *any* opensolaris.org mailing list. OpenSolaris has nothing to do with Solaris release planning, and other distributions are free to define their own release schedules. That said, Sun's management and marketing determine when a new release of Solaris (the product) will be cut, and when resources are expended in the (very difficult) job of backporting features to older releases. The considerations are complicated, and include independent vendor support for the new release, marketing planning, expected content, customer feedback and many other bits. If someone asked my opinion, I'd say that I'd prefer not to see features added to the old release, and instead would rather have a new release, even if customers aren't quite ready for one yet. Nevada is already -- by far! -- the longest release cycle we've ever had. Fortunately, none of us here are really involved in the process, so we can't give you clear or accurate answers. ;-} -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ zones-discuss mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org