[ogb-discuss] Device Driver Community

[Keith M Wesolowski]

On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 03:49:25PM -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote:

> No, I don't know it's true, and in fact I don't believe it to be true. 
> Just because you toss a tarball into one of the communities doesn't 
> actually make it a part of OpenSolaris, and there is where we see a 
> difference.

What criteria would you use to make this determination?

> Actually, one could argue that OpenSolaris is not even a complete 
> distribution, it requires you build it on Solaris Express, and by itself 
> it is not useful.

Not only could one argue that OpenSolaris is not a distribution, many
have, including the General FAQ[0] makes it pretty clear that it's
not.  Nor is it intended to be one.

"Not usable by itself as operating environment" and "not useful" are
not the same.

> This is the same reason people come here after hearing Sun's management 
> talk up OpenSolaris, thinking it's a distribution, and then they find out 

How can we better explain the distinction to those managers making
misleading or incorrect presentations?

> We can agree to disagree on this, no skin off my back. I'm only pointing 
> out that OpenSolaris is not all the packages that would be in a 
> distribution, such as Sun's Solaris product.

Since this is stated at the very beginning of the General FAQ and has
been pointed out countless times on mailing lists, I don't see how
this should be surprising to anyone, least of all you.

> >ON is just one of the consolidations already participating in OpenSolaris,
> >and it's actually slightly behind in openness - JDS already has its master
> >gate on opensolaris.org, not just a mirror like ON, and can allow community
> >putbacks directly to it.   SFW, X, NWS, Docs - all out there sharing their 
> >code and participating in OpenSolaris already.
> 
> However you want to look at it is fine. I don't wear rose colored glasses, 
> nor do the the customers of Sun or much of the community.

I'm a bit confused.  What exactly is your angle here, Alan?  If
putting a consolidation into an SCM repository that's available to the
public and creating the ability to take direct contributions from
non-Sun Contributors isn't enough to say that a consolidation is
"already participating," what would be?  And if X and JDS aren't, how
can anyone claim that ON is?

> Considering that SFW was originally a designation for Sun Free Ware, it 
> seems that doesn't fit very well. Maybe it should be OFW, but I suspect 
> this might be another issue we'll agree to disagree on.

The name is clearly no longer appropriate.  It's fine to hate SFW (I
sure do) but the name, outdated though it is, is the smallest of all
the consolidation's defects.  If you believe that the concepts
embodied in SFW - forget the name for a moment - make sense at all, do
you agree that it would be an appropriate place for your library?  If
not, what consolidation would be more appropriate and why?

[0] http://www.opensolaris.org/os/about/faq/general_faq/

-- 
Keith M Wesolowski		"Sir, we're surrounded!" 
FishWorks			"Excellent; we can attack in any direction!"