[ogb-discuss] Device Driver Community

[Alan DuBoff]

On Fri, 4 May 2007, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:

> 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?

I'm not exactly sure, but what are we trying to achieve? To me it seems to 
have a distribution and/or create a system that is open and free. This 
means to get rid of closed binaries to accomplish that.

This means improving the system, and integrating things together, much 
like Solaris is today.

What Sun has done is just tossed a bunch of opensource software onto a 
website and now claim it to be a part of opensolaris. BFD, it means 
nothing to me in regards to opensolaris.

> 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.

Well, I hope that at some point it will. Nexenta is a case where they 
provide a distribution that uses opensolaris as a base. However, is their 
Xorg the same Xorg from the packages that AlanC & Co. provide on 
opensolaris? I suspect they grab the sources from the mainline of Xorg. 
And if they do, it's ok, it's Xorg software, not opensolaris.

What I can download and build today that is distributed as opensolaris is 
really ON, and that is my distinction. I realize we have other open source 
software in Solaris. All of it is not on opensolaris, but by the 
definition I'm given it is certainly a part of opensolaris.

>> 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?

That I can't solve. Sun Executive Management makes comments and claims and 
uses opensolaris in some of it. They also critisize companies like Red Hat 
for some of the stuff they do. Why? I don't know, and I can't help in how 
the public perceives that.

The pieces which are opensolaris today are ON basically. No hidden 
meanings there, but this is what as a community we manage and distribute 
as sources. Packages which are a part of Solaris are complimentary to 
opensolaris, and maybe my problem is the view that opensolaris is an 
entity in itself, as Linux is (in regards to distribution not kernel), or 
*BSD, etc...if we look at Xorg in *BSD, it is an intregal part of the 
sytsem, it can be installed and managed by *BSD, it is a part of the 
repository that can be downloaded and built with the system.

I give other communities a lot of credit for freeing themself from the 
proprietary code (i.e., readline as an example) to make themself open and 
free. I hope we will be able to do that with opensolaris, without that 
ability we will never be considered completely open and free, and we 
shouldn't.

By using the name opensolaris, we imply that.

> 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.

I have to admit something to you Keith. I don't read every single document 
and couldn't have stated where that is even. I suspect that other folks in 
the opensolaris community are less familiar with some of this stuff than 
me, and I don't consider myself to be a knowledgebase on opensolaris. So, 
if I'm having some problems understanding it, I can assure you that others 
are having even that much more difficulty with it.

> 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?

No real angle other than wanting to see opensolaris be something, other 
than just a holding tank for other software. I invision at some point to 
have a full distribution where those components are integrated and usable, 
so that many distributions can do as the Linux and/or *BSD communities can 
do today. A true open and free system. Where not only Sun, but the 
community as a whole can participate. Somewhere that people want to 
come to and be a part of, to participate and help with various 
aspects. Not just coding, but all areas, yet coding seems to be a 
primary focus for us at this point, it's not the only. Maybe that's too 
much to expect.

> 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?

I don't know that it makes sense or not. I felt that it would be suited in 
the Networking community, it is a communications library. If I used the 
library to write some software, to act as a transport for instance, maybe 
it would belong there if a community was created for that specific.

It is already truely open and free software that anyone can use for 
commercial or non-commercial purpose. It is licensed under BSD 3 clause, 
and as such can be used in any way the user wants within the minor 
limitations of the license. There is no requirement for any contributor 
agreement, by me or Sun (should I contribute it to opensolaris).

It could fit in the SFW consolidation, there is other similar software in 
there. But I don't see the purpose and would see the SFW consolidation and 
being integrated into something else at some point that is a larger type 
of consolidation, such as layered software. While there are a few useful 
examples of using the library, like hget (acts as a simple, lean version 
of wget), or hhead (get the head returned from an http call), or even 
hpost...those all make a simple call to the library to complete an http 
transfer. FWIW, the code was written and published in it's first version 
within Embedded Linux Journal, so it has a magazine article that goes 
along with it and the text of that is included in the package.

It has also had several fixes and patches contributed by the open source 
community, and is used internal at HP as well as a few other places. I am 
not sure it fits my idea of what opensolaris is at this point, it's just 
an opensource package. I can run it through opensource review, it is BSD. 
I was vaguely interested in creating a transport to get packages, much 
like pkg-get works with blastwave today. By itself, it's only a library, 
so I don't know where would be an appropriate place for it as it is not 
used in opensolaris at all today.

--

Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group