[indiana-discuss] Package names and versioning for upcoming releases

[Qingye Jiang (John)]

When we are moving to opensource, I think we are really moving to where 
the (potential) users are, and deliver what the users would expect to 
see and use. When I typed the command "pkg status -a" and there came a 
long list of stuff that I did not understand unless I want to dig deep 
into the definition of FMRI for packages. A large number of potential 
users might just give up at that point.

Again, can we think about the word 'user friendly', rather than the Sun 
guildlines that were written in the grandma age? Isn't it because we 
lost market share miserably in the past that we want to make something 
different?

Best regards,

("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._             Qingye Jiang (John)
 `6_ 6  )   `-.  (     ).`-.__.`)     Senior Manager
  (_Y_.)'  ._   )  `._ `. ``-..-      Sun Developer Network, China
 _..`--'_..-_/  /--'_.' ,'            Phone: +86-10-62673347
(il),-''  (li),'  ((!.-'              http://developers.sun.com.cn/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
About ME: visit http://www.qyjohn.net/, http://calendar.qyjohn.net/.
About US: visit http://wiki.gceclub.sun.com.cn/index.php/SDN_China . 




Shawn Walker 写道:
> On 22/11/2007, Christopher Kampmeier <Christopher.Kampmeier at sun.com> wrote:
>   
>> A majority of packages in the milestone 1 release contain the "SUNW"
>> prefix and many of the packages include "0.5.11-0.75" as the version
>> number.  In the Jan or Q4 releases of Indiana, will these packages be
>> modified to:
>>
>> 1) remove the superfluous (IMHO) "SUNW" prefix from the package name,
>>     
>
> It is not superfluous. See current Sun software packaging guidelines.
> However, this is obviously a topic that needs discussion since I'm
> certain ARC will cover it.
>
>   
>> 2) represent a bit more verbose and readily identifiable package names, and
>>     
>
> This is already provided for via the metadata that IPS allows you to have.
>
>   
>> Our primary target of Linux developers won't miss the "SUNW" prefix,
>> they'll be glad to see more readable package names and they will demand
>> to have the proper versions of the components made explicit when listing
>> the installed and available packages.
>>     
>
> The "SUNW" prefix is a red herring; it in no way prevents us from
> having more descriptive names for packages thanks to IPS metadata.
>
>   
>> Given the huge amount of investment and great strides being made by the
>> Indiana project, I'd hate to see these aspects adversely impact the
>> reception of the new distro.
>>     
>
> I sincerely doubt that the prefixing has any real impact whatsoever on
> usability. In reality, I suspect good tools for searching and
> installing are all that matter.
>
>