[arc-discuss] Discussion requested for a new ARC Policy on "Expectation Taxonomy and Repository Requirements"

[James Carlson]

John Plocher writes:
> There is a double standard here, but it isn't what you think.  Distros
> like Nexenta, Belinix and Schillix did exactly what ips/pkg has done,
> without any attempt at ARC interaction or exposure, and nobody thought
> twice about things.  But, when *we* attempt to do the same thing, we
> get our shorts tied up in knots.  Go Figure.

I see no such double standard.  Unlike those other distributions,
Sun's folks are busy trying to jam a pile of FOSS into SFW and through
ARC review.  That flood, as well-intentioned as it surely must be, is
a key part of the problem.

If Indiana were _truly_ like those other distributions, it would be
taking in the piles of FOSS directly (into its own distribution, not
into SFW or any consolidation) and wouldn't be bothering with
architectural review.

If that were so, we wouldn't be having this discussion.  :-/

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677