[indiana-discuss] A different take

[Ian Murdock]

Eric J. Ray wrote:
> So, all of the current discussions notwithstanding, let's think
> about a different approach to Indiana (or call it Ohio, or
> Illinois--whatever). Consider that we're really trying to build
> a base for others to take and leverage, and we've clearly demonstrated
> that everything is subject to a religious war, let's regard
> it differently. Any distribution could take Indiana, in some form,
> and arbitrarily build on it to have an OpenSolaris distribution
> that meets specific needs.
> 
> Indiana Core could be the absolute minimal functional system.
> It would be a subset of ON plus a subset of Install--the bits
> required to successfully boot to a console/text interface and to
> upgrade the system from there. In Solaris terms, this would likely
> define the list of packages that constitutes a minimal supported
> system, plus a core set of drivers.
> 
> Indiana Basic could be Indiana Core, plus the rest of ON,
> plus more of Install, plus X, plus some reasonably friendly WM/Desktop
> setup. Basically, a minimal usable system, to let someone
> bootstrap themselves into their happy place. (E.g.,
> # indiana-get -repository=gnu-bleeding-edge update-all or the
> GUI equivalent)
> 
> With these pieces, a distro builder could start with Core and add
> pieces, or, if appropriate, start with Basic and add to it. Someone
> looking to embed OpenSolaris into an appliance would likely just
> use with Core. Someone interested in a single-function, easily
> controllable device (like a VMware-type appliance) might use
> Basic.
> 
> I've been talking with a couple of engineers about what Dave Miner
> termed a "distribution constructor", which could be a toolset to help
> anyone take the Core/Basic pieces and add components as needed,
> then easily end up with a functional set of bits that actually could
> be installed and used. It's something that we're really serious
> about at least investigating, and current plans include staffing/
> funding for it. (Yes, it'd be open.)
> 
> An approach like this is starting to make sense to me because it's
> clear that we cannot meet everyone's needs, and the next best
> thing is to provide the tools to EASILY allow OpenSolaris distros
> to meet those various needs. A side effect, of course, is that
> various distros based off the same Core are very likely to be
> compatible with each other, modulo various package dependencies.
> 
> Thoughts?

Yes, that's the current thinking, though we must do more than just
build a base for others to take and leverage--that's just part of
it. The other part is building a complete OS that people would
actually want to use. The core by itself isn't going to be
interesting. Indiana may not meet everyone's needs, but it should meet
someone's.. Perhaps I'm just being thrown by your use of the term
"basic". I think more of Indiana Core and Indiana, with the
latter including the desktop etc. (and comprising the single CD).
Otherwise, I'm in full agreement that this is the right way.

-ian
-- 
Ian Murdock
650-331-9324
http://ianmurdock.com/

"Don't look back--something might be gaining on you." --Satchel Paige