From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 03:26:05 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:26:05 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729a9bd.7OHTNnXMRBXiYE25%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Jim Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called:
> > "Sun OpenSolaris ...."
>
> Why would "Sun OpenSolaris" make sense? Actually, that expression has 
> been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the 
> confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use 
> of the brand?

Of course, this would make sense. 

Only Sun has the rights on the name OpenSolaris but OpenSolaris is a product
of the work from a community. As it makes no sense to allow everyone to call
a distribution "OpenSolaris", it make no sense to call one OpenSolaris.
And because of the fact that OpenSolaris is the product of a community, Sun
does not have the moral right to use the name OpenSolaris for a distribution.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 03:28:46 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:28:46 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4729aa5e.lvbVFSF5Il2CkPKV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> > How about trying to prove that there is no such harm?
>
> That's my point. If you want to be able to prove *why* we shouldn't
> have a distribution called OpenSolaris you must demonstrate the harm
> it would cause as the benefit has already been demonstrated and talked
> about.

I did give several examples why it would harm other distributions.
Could you please be so kind to explain why you believe that there is no harm?

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 03:31:52 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 10:31:52 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
Message-ID: <5F1F09FE-8E86-473A-9BAD-9BF8E1980068@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 02:01, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> So why not just create something that runs and call it OpenSolaris  
>> and then
> we are done with the confusion.  There are bigger battles to fight  
> than word
> games.

I could not agree more with you there, Dennis. We are where we are.  
And actually, it's pretty good :-)

S.



From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 03:39:38 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:39:38 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:

>  >> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >> I have problems if this was not labelled with "Sun" as this would cause
> >> harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions.
>
> > Shawn Walker wrote:
> > I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly
> > *how* other distributions would be harmed.
>
>
> I *think* Joerg is referring to the classic channel partner -vs- direct
> sales problem - if the OpenSolaris Community has its own distro, where
> is there room for other distros to compete?

You make an important mistake here: Indiana is not a community initated 
distro but a _Sun_ initiated one.

SchilliX was the first community initiaded OpenSolaris distro but Sun
did not like to help with this distro.

It is most unprobable that Indiana will be _the_ OpenSolaris distribution
of the community as it was not "the community" that did decide to start the
project. We could have a real community distribution if Sun did help with 
SchilliX, but I did get the answer: "no, we definitely won't do that" from many
sites insite Sun. 

There are already several independent OpenSolaris distributions and you could 
not roll back the years.... The chance for a _single_ OpenSolaris distro as
a joint effort from Sun and the community has been missed because Sun was not
ready for this at the time when it had been possible.

Sun could have a much better stand in the OSS world if there was a clear 
commitment to community originated efforts like BerliOS, Blastvave and SchilliX.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 03:52:42 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:52:42 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4728AFB7.8050300@truemail.co.th>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728AFB7.8050300@truemail.co.th>
Message-ID: <4729affa.oSRArFoAZU25iVhD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Doug Scott <dougs at truemail.co.th> wrote:

>    So far Indiana is the only (in progress) distribution which has been 
> proposed as a project on opensolaris.org. To me this is the core factor. 
> All the other distributions are not under the mandate of the 
> opensolaris.org and their future can not be voted on by the core 
> contributors of the relevant communities. i.e. There is no other show in 
> town unless you propose SchilliX as a project and have time to back it up :)

SchilliX is a project and it still exists and Sun still does not help with SchilliX.....

The main issue is that Sun did miss the time to create a commiunity distribution
as Sun did not help with SchilliX. The time for createing a real single 
community distro did pass - it is too late.




J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 03:57:10 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:57:10 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0710311015t137a01ccpb16cd98c752d49ee@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<b9c544f0710311015t137a01ccpb16cd98c752d49ee@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4729b106.ioA8KSXBA3n28a0D%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> > "Sun OpenSolaris" and "Nexenta OpenSolaris" do make sense to me, at
> > least in that light.  They're shorthand expressions for "Sun's Solaris
> > distribution based on OpenSolaris" and "the Nexenta distribution based
> > on OpenSolaris."
>
> Except Sun doesn't have a distribution that is really based on the
> work of OpenSolaris.org right now.

Do you like to tell us that other distributiuons are not based on OpenSolaris?

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 03:58:10 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:58:10 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0710311022k92a8b3asca10fb7e27f7051b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710310944xce8c71ch560635dbcb1112c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B35A.3010900@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0710311007nddd8ea7g8736742279e7a5fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311022k92a8b3asca10fb7e27f7051b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4729b142.CqDvqGcM6XGDvYX2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> Ubuntu thrived despite Debian's long years of existence.
>
> Slackware continues despite RedHat's rise.
>
> SUSE continues despite RedHat.
>
> Mandraiva continues despite ... etc.

Does Suse claim to publish "Linux"?
Does Ubuntu claim to publish "Linux"?
Does Redhat claim to publish "Linux"?
Does Mandriva claim to publish "Linux"?



J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 03:55:38 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:55:38 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0710311006x6927c8d7m643a4e4d63b6c5b0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728b413.vPc5vb3r2kgEnl1n%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710311006x6927c8d7m643a4e4d63b6c5b0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4729b0aa.M60blQMi1s6Ky5kp%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro "OpenSolaris", many people believe
> > > > that this is the one and only.
> > >
> > > I don't believe that for a moment. Going to ubuntu.com only lets me
> > > download Ubuntu easily; but there are links that go off to other
> > > places where you can get Kubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. Many people do know
> > > that other "flavours" of Ubuntu exist.
> >
> > With current OpenSolaris distros, we have much more variance in the feeling
> > than with different ubuntu variants.
>
> Which is an interesting tidbit, but doesn't disprove my point.
>
> Remember that one of the goals in using the trademark is to set user
> expectations.

This is simple: just set up a web page that points to all OpenSolaris based 
distributions.

You cannot install "OpenSolaris" but an OpenSolaris based distribution.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 04:00:43 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:00:43 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4728C22E.8070605@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<4728b2d9.evG0FRMNz6xTs5xO%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728C22E.8070605@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729b1db.7tSiKivbgUdGzvt1%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Sara Dornsife <Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM> wrote:

> > As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it.
> >   
>
> We have been discussing TM guidelines and usage scenarios for the past 
> two weeks. We are working to create NEW guidelines. Yes, the current 
> (past) guidelines have been restrictive. I'd like to see you work with 
> the rest of us on how to create new guidelines that work better for all 
> distributions.

We had this discussion long ago and we decided that it was a bad idea to allow
a distribution to use the name OpenSolaris. I do not see anything that would 
change the constraints here.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 04:02:32 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:02:32 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0710311039s2fac55b7v9264cbc34c58bae6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<4728b2d9.evG0FRMNz6xTs5xO%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710311039s2fac55b7v9264cbc34c58bae6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4729b248.oMbus3OX7KpPIuaF%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> > As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it.
>
> That is incorrect; the proposed guidelines would allow them to use the
> name with the single restriction that they could not call themselves
> "OpenSolaris."

As I already mentioned: I have no problem is Sun calls Indiana 
"Sun OpenSolaris". Allowing a distribution to use the name OpenSolaris
would harm all others.

 



J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From mb1x at gmx.com  Thu Nov  1 04:06:28 2007
From: mb1x at gmx.com (Martin Bochnig)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:06:28 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <4729B334.9080404@gmx.com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
>
>   
>>  >> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>     
>>>> I have problems if this was not labelled with "Sun" as this would cause
>>>> harm to other existing OpenSolaris based distributions.
>>>>         
>>> Shawn Walker wrote:
>>> I have yet to see any qualifying statements that indicate exactly
>>> *how* other distributions would be harmed.
>>>       
>> I *think* Joerg is referring to the classic channel partner -vs- direct
>> sales problem - if the OpenSolaris Community has its own distro, where
>> is there room for other distros to compete?
>>     
>
> You make an important mistake here: Indiana is not a community initated 
> distro but a _Sun_ initiated one.
>
> SchilliX was the first community initiaded OpenSolaris distro but Sun
> did not like to help with this distro.
>
> It is most unprobable that Indiana will be _the_ OpenSolaris distribution
> of the community as it was not "the community" that did decide to start the
> project. We could have a real community distribution if Sun did help with 
> SchilliX, but I did get the answer: "no, we definitely won't do that" from many
> sites insite Sun. 
>
> There are already several independent OpenSolaris distributions and you could 
> not roll back the years.... The chance for a _single_ OpenSolaris distro as
> a joint effort from Sun and the community has been missed because Sun was not
> ready for this at the time when it had been possible.
>
> Sun could have a much better stand in the OSS world if there was a clear 
> commitment to community originated efforts like BerliOS, Blastvave and SchilliX.
>
> J?rg
>
>   


Nobody wants to hear this.
Write a nice mail stating "let's stop discussing about the name, let's 
just bring it out ... and then let's see" and even one of the highest 
bosses will respond.
(seen today)
And in terms of Blastwave: I cannot make any statement (as I don't know 
the details) to which extend it has been Blastwave's own decision to 
mostly stay out of opensolaris.org. The good climate between the 
Director of Blastwave and a top OGB member makes me wonder. But if no 
person ever responds to my Blastwave related questions, I hardly have 
any other choice, than to guess.
It is not my business? Well, if this is a community driven framework 
here, then .....

%martin


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 04:12:01 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:12:01 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
Message-ID: <4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Jon Trulson <jon at radscan.com> wrote:

> > It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro "OpenSolaris", many people believe
> > that this is the one and only.
> >
>
>    FWIW, as a third party that develops software on Solaris, I would
>    welcome an 'OpenSolaris Reference' distribution.

This would cause problems too.

It is better to define a binary compatibility guideline and to have a test 
for compatibility. We, the community of people who create distributions
in addition need to take care that this test is complete enough.

To understand this problem: If I did not push Sun to verify /usr/bin/tar 
against _my_ POSIX compliance test, Sun tar would still not create/read
POSIX.1-1988 compliant archives although it did pass the OpenGroup tests.


Note that if a distribution _adds_ this to the compatibility definitions,
this would make this distro unsuitable as a reference. For the same reason,
I need to correct you as I believe that believe that "Sun OpenSolaris" could 
be a reference distribution. "Sun OpenSolaris" would most likely include
more software than the reference requires and thus make it unsuitable as a 
reference. 

A reference distro has no less _and_ no more than the interface definition
and grants users that software compiled on that distro to run on any
other compatible distro.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 04:50:41 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:50:41 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <E1D63AE8-35FC-4A69-B1B5-AC484A3D8171@sun.com>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com> <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311501210.1623@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<4728E2B9.9080202@sun.com>
	<E1D63AE8-35FC-4A69-B1B5-AC484A3D8171@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729bd91.szT6awFdpzK5sHcj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:

> *  The first community project with the chance to do so is producing  
> an alpha-level preview.

So you like to call SchilliX OpenSolaris?

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 02:32:54 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 10:32:54 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311751590.15914@m5.radscan.com> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<20071031204256.GC39181@submonkey.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311751590.15914@m5.radscan.com> 
Message-ID: <200711010932.lA19Wsd7021581@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>



>   What we (and I assume, other 'commercial' developers) care about is
>   the binary compatibility, stability of the kernel API, userland
>   interface - libc, basic commands (shell, cp/rm/etc), and of course
>   the packaging mechanism, to name a few.  Kernel/Userland
>   compatibility within major Solaris revisions is a also big plus.

Compatibility is a very difficult issue to assess; even when having a 
reference distribution, issues like the following arise:

	- if the incompatibility is due to a bug in the reference 
distribution, does it count?
	- if an incompatibility is due to a difference in default $PATH,
does it count

There are many different ones I can think of.

Casper



From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 02:39:36 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 10:39:36 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-ID: <200711010939.lA19da6K022901@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>



>Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
>more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
>includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
>Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.


What bits does Indiana include which are not Sun originated which are
not also found in say, SXCE?  (I.e., ksh93 and caiman do not count)

Casper



From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 05:14:12 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:14:12 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [caiman-discuss] Move	/usr/gnu/bin to front of path, add /sbin
In-Reply-To: <472913A0.5030403@Sun.Com>
References: <20071031025414.945934FDC@mail.opensolaris.org>
	<c1eabf400710310943v43a34568nb6c6965d8b9692@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B7E4.1090302@sun.com>
	<9625978a0710311038k33e7564eq8fea0201cf31c57@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311041t61adeb30le9d5eb043e453b6b@mail.gmail.com>
	<9625978a0710311046l23693109x3768e45ef647bc13@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728C03B.5000403@sun.com>
	<cd45720b0710311325r241a266en147b937898274e83@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728EC7E.1070208@sun.com>
	<cd45720b0710311404n49c963f2ld41b8b4f92f586c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<472913A0.5030403@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <4729c314.0d14FTteMj2s+f2p%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:

> The point where your comments are a bit on-topic is in the compatibility
> discussion we are having over in <trademark-policy-dev>.  Obviously,
> simply having a tool called "/usr/bin/tar" isn't enough to be
> "compatible", you also need to adhere to some behavioral standard.

A program named tar is not part of the POSIX standard.

A program named tar is defined in SUSv2 but POSIX is based on SUSv3.

> The real question is "which standard?"
>
>    Ship "Sun's old crufty Sys5 tools" in /usr/bin and you alienate
>    the GNU-Linux crowd who consider being different from GNU to
>    be a bug;

POSIX requires you to call:

PATH=`getconf PATH`
sh

to get a POSIX compliant environment.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 05:20:45 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:20:45 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
> more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
> includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
> Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.

A really comparison. Try to find out how hard it was to include ksh93 and 
that star is still not in!

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 05:24:00 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:24:00 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729c560.k89XdekAKBeoorfj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Ian Murdock <Ian.Murdock at Sun.COM> wrote:

> James Carlson wrote:
> > Jim Grisanzio writes:
> >> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called:
> >>> "Sun OpenSolaris ...."
> >> Why would "Sun OpenSolaris" make sense? Actually, that expression has 
> >> been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the 
> >> confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use 
> >> of the brand?
> > 
> > I think it makes a lot of sense, by analogy to Linux.  You can't
> > "install Linux" -- without getting an immediate "which one?" question.
>
> You see this as a feature? Spend any time trying to build products
> for or around "Linux", and you'll quickly start to see it as a bug.

We do not need to discuss whether it is a feature or not.

It is too late to avoid the same for OpenSolaris as Sun did miss the chance
to cooperate with SchilliX 2.5 years ago.

We already have more than _one_ single OpenSolaris distribution, you cannot
roll back the years.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 05:26:46 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:26:46 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
Message-ID: <4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Dennis Clarke" <dclarke at blastwave.org> wrote:

>
> > James Carlson wrote:
> >> Jim Grisanzio writes:
> >>> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I have no problem if Sun would start to publish something called:
> >>>> "Sun OpenSolaris ...."
> >>> Why would "Sun OpenSolaris" make sense? Actually, that expression has
> >>> been used (incorrectly) in the media, and it's only added to the
> >>> confusion. Also, isn't it a benefit for the distros to share in the use
> >>> of the brand?
> >>
> >> I think it makes a lot of sense, by analogy to Linux.  You can't
> >> "install Linux" -- without getting an immediate "which one?" question.
> >
> > You see this as a feature? Spend any time trying to build products
> > for or around "Linux", and you'll quickly start to see it as a bug.
>
> Solaris is a UNIX(tm) system.
>
> Solaris is Solaris which is UNIX(tm).
>
> If you want UNIX then you can go looking for AIX or HPUX or SCO(?) or
> Solaris. I was always under the impression that OpenSolaris was the
> community project that worked with and dealt with the source code to
> Solaris.

A good example!

Let us decide that Sun first needs to call Solaris "UNIX" before a 
OpenSolaris based distro is allowed to call itself "OpenSolaris".

Solaris is a UNIX(tm) system but you cannot call it "UNIX", it is still Solaris.


J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 05:30:05 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:30:05 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <4729c6cd.zUJ/PjPukc6IEx1+%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:

> Martin Bochnig wrote:
> >>> Renaming "Indiana" to "OpenSolaris": Wouldn't that be like renaming the
> >>> brand "Crysler" to "Automibile"?
> >>> IMO a "Crysler" is not equal to "Automobile". It would be a subclass of
> >>> it (with more nested subclasses and then n-millions of instances/leaf
> >>> nodes).
>
>
> I think you have it - exactly.
>
> This is like calling the automobiles built in the BMW Factory "BMWs".

Does BMW get it's cars from an open cummunity?

Bad example.....

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 05:36:11 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:36:11 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
Message-ID: <4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Al Hopper <al at logical-approach.com> wrote:

> In the real world, we know, intuitively, that there is no such thing 
> as a universal screw-driver.  We know that every toolbox contains many 
> screwdrivers and we give them different broad-based names to corral 
> them into general categories... like "philips screwdriver", 
> "flat-blade screwdriver".. blah, blah.

Even a Phlips screwdriver is unable to corrrectly deal with any cross recess
screw as Philips is just one of at least three _incompatible_ "cross recess" 
screw systems.

This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level 
of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 05:37:21 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:37:21 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <47293D81.6000308@gmx.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<472937ED.1000004@sun.com> <47293D81.6000308@gmx.com>
Message-ID: <4729c881.4mA8g2QxL2ZAz+/K%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Martin Bochnig <mb1x at gmx.com> wrote:

> Sara Dornsife wrote:
> > Gotta love a good car analogy!
>
>
> :-)

Car analogies are always wrong...


J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From me at tomservo.cc  Thu Nov  1 05:50:13 2007
From: me at tomservo.cc (Mario Goebbels)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:50:13 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <4729CB85.50109@tomservo.cc>

>> Solaris is a UNIX(tm) system.
>>
>> Solaris is Solaris which is UNIX(tm).
>>
>> If you want UNIX then you can go looking for AIX or HPUX or SCO(?) or
>> Solaris. I was always under the impression that OpenSolaris was the
>> community project that worked with and dealt with the source code to
>> Solaris.
> 
> A good example!
> 
> Let us decide that Sun first needs to call Solaris "UNIX" before a 
> OpenSolaris based distro is allowed to call itself "OpenSolaris".
> 
> Solaris is a UNIX(tm) system but you cannot call it "UNIX", it is still Solaris.

One way or another, should OpenSolaris take off as Sun hopes, and have
entities of various sizes jump on the bandwagon and create distros, they
WILL differ and be incompatible. Just like over in Linux land.

By then however, the OpenSolaris moniker will have been wasted because
of the usual shitty marketing decisions. Sun's already starting to gain
street cred for being annoying to deal with via OpenOffice. OO however
has already a nice foothold and can afford some drama. OpenSolaris
however can't (yet anyway).

I hope Ian and however else is responsible for that decision wise up and
retract the distro name. They can claim that it was named "OpenSolaris
DP" because it was a test of the OS codebase in the wild, to retcon
everything, and no one would probably say anything.

?-mg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071101/5eed8d11/attachment.bin>

From me at tomservo.cc  Thu Nov  1 06:03:11 2007
From: me at tomservo.cc (Mario Goebbels)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:03:11 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729CB85.50109@tomservo.cc>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>	<47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>	<4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729CB85.50109@tomservo.cc>
Message-ID: <4729CE8F.30703@tomservo.cc>

I guess the point I was trying to make but forgot to add is that
OpenSolaris as baseline compatibility tag is now wasted, unless the
naming decision is reverted.

-mg

> One way or another, should OpenSolaris take off as Sun hopes, and have
> entities of various sizes jump on the bandwagon and create distros, they
> WILL differ and be incompatible. Just like over in Linux land.
> 
> By then however, the OpenSolaris moniker will have been wasted because
> of the usual shitty marketing decisions. Sun's already starting to gain
> street cred for being annoying to deal with via OpenOffice. OO however
> has already a nice foothold and can afford some drama. OpenSolaris
> however can't (yet anyway).
> 
> I hope Ian and however else is responsible for that decision wise up and
> retract the distro name. They can claim that it was named "OpenSolaris
> DP" because it was a test of the OS codebase in the wild, to retcon
> everything, and no one would probably say anything.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071101/2be8a09c/attachment.bin>

From james.d.carlson at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 05:31:49 2007
From: james.d.carlson at Sun.COM (James Carlson)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 08:31:49 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [caiman-discuss] Move	/usr/gnu/bin to front of path, add /sbin
In-Reply-To: <4729c314.0d14FTteMj2s+f2p%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <20071031025414.945934FDC@mail.opensolaris.org>
	<c1eabf400710310943v43a34568nb6c6965d8b9692@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B7E4.1090302@sun.com>
	<9625978a0710311038k33e7564eq8fea0201cf31c57@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311041t61adeb30le9d5eb043e453b6b@mail.gmail.com>
	<9625978a0710311046l23693109x3768e45ef647bc13@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728C03B.5000403@sun.com>
	<cd45720b0710311325r241a266en147b937898274e83@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728EC7E.1070208@sun.com>
	<cd45720b0710311404n49c963f2ld41b8b4f92f586c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<472913A0.5030403@Sun.Com>
	<4729c314.0d14FTteMj2s+f2p%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <18217.50997.164139.85498@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

Joerg Schilling writes:
> John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
> > The real question is "which standard?"
> >
> >    Ship "Sun's old crufty Sys5 tools" in /usr/bin and you alienate
> >    the GNU-Linux crowd who consider being different from GNU to
> >    be a bug;
> 
> POSIX requires you to call:
> 
> PATH=`getconf PATH`
> sh
> 
> to get a POSIX compliant environment.

I'm picking nits here, but it doesn't actually require you to do that.
It requires us to *provide* that interface and for it to work.  How
you (the programmer) choose to get into the POSIX environment on any
platform (including an OpenSolaris-based distribution) is your choice,
not something POSIX dictates.

In other words, if you plan to make your POSIX-using software work on
SXDE, it's sufficient to read the standards(5) man page, and then set
up the PATH variable as described there.

Note that there's a difference between POSIX.1-2001 and POSIX.2a-1992,
so you also probably have to decide "which POSIX."  If you use just
"/usr/bin/getconf PATH" on OpenSolaris today, you'll get POSIX.2a-1992
(SUSv2), not POSIX.1-2001 (SUSv3).

But, then, that's the great thing about standards.  There are so many
to choose from.

-- 
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


From bayapuneni_chaitanya at symantec.com  Thu Nov  1 06:06:09 2007
From: bayapuneni_chaitanya at symantec.com (bvk chaitanya)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:36:09 +0530
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729B334.9080404@gmx.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>	<47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729B334.9080404@gmx.com>
Message-ID: <4729CF41.2020507@symantec.com>

First, congratulations to Indiana team.  Thanks to Ian and Simon.  You 
people did a wonderful job in brining Indiana to life.



Though, i am nobody here, i agree with you Martin and Joerg.  I joined 
into OpenSolaris groups with lots of enthusiasm (before Indiana of 
course.) and now i feel more like, whole OpenSolaris is a political 
play-ground for Sun and its managers.  Anyway i wish all the best for 
Suns Indiana team.


bvk-chaitanya


-- 
Effective way to suppress the concern of any community member is,
"simply ignore him"  ;-)  It works!  See *the* OpenSolaris disto!



From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 06:19:02 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 08:19:02 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729CE8F.30703@tomservo.cc>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729CB85.50109@tomservo.cc> <4729CE8F.30703@tomservo.cc>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711010619q3427a08aw59f6f99ffa9149be@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Mario Goebbels <me at tomservo.cc> wrote:
> I guess the point I was trying to make but forgot to add is that
> OpenSolaris as baseline compatibility tag is now wasted, unless the
> naming decision is reverted.

How so? A name can have multiple meanings as we have already discussed
so many times before these past weeks.

Windows is obviously branded with the "Windows" name.

However, they also have compatibility branding such as "Designed for
Windows XP".

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 06:20:21 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 08:20:21 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729CF41.2020507@symantec.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729B334.9080404@gmx.com> <4729CF41.2020507@symantec.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711010620u7f3f7bc4g7b9fd9805183755b@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, bvk chaitanya <bayapuneni_chaitanya at symantec.com> wrote:
> Though, i am nobody here, i agree with you Martin and Joerg.  I joined
> into OpenSolaris groups with lots of enthusiasm (before Indiana of
> course.) and now i feel more like, whole OpenSolaris is a political
> play-ground for Sun and its managers.  Anyway i wish all the best for
> Suns Indiana team.

It feels like a playground for many of us, including me, and I am
neither a Sun employee or manager.

Come; jump on the Indiana swing! Wheeee! (yes, a bit over the
top...but you get the point.)

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From dclarke at blastwave.org  Thu Nov  1 06:25:47 2007
From: dclarke at blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 09:25:47 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <13E72BB6-3AE3-4121-9AB1-0EAC9BBC520A@sun.com>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com> <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<47293492.9040604@sun.com> <47296158.1020806@sun.com>
	<4729BC4F.10705@sun.com> <4729C7D2.3050702@sun.com>
	<4729CC89.4010507@sun.com>
	<13E72BB6-3AE3-4121-9AB1-0EAC9BBC520A@sun.com>
Message-ID: <3367.72.39.216.186.1193923547.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>


> [Follow-up to trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org]
>
> On Nov 1, 2007, at 12:54, Alan Burlison wrote:
>
>> If someone has something concrete, can we please have a page set up
>> and
>> the link widely disseminated?  Ta.
>
> http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php?
> title=Trademark_usage_and_Branding_guideline

  I just added that link over top of the image on the Blastwave homepage.

Dennis




From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 06:26:59 2007
From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (EricB)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 08:26:59 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <13E72BB6-3AE3-4121-9AB1-0EAC9BBC520A@sun.com>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com> <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<47293492.9040604@sun.com> <47296158.1020806@sun.com>
	<4729BC4F.10705@sun.com>
	<4729C7D2.3050702@sun.com> <4729CC89.4010507@sun.com>
	<13E72BB6-3AE3-4121-9AB1-0EAC9BBC520A@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729D423.4000403@sun.com>

Simon Phipps wrote:

>      We reject: kings, presidents and voting...


Re voting: I believe that we here believe in voting (community-wide) 
when a widely and deeply debated issue calls for it. (Which is to say, 
maybe a couple times every few years at most.)

Eric


>      We believe in: rough consensus and running code.
>              -- David Clark, http://ietf20.isoc.org/videos/ 
> future_ietf_92.pdf, p.19
> _______________________________________________
> 


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 06:28:21 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:28:21 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <5F1F09FE-8E86-473A-9BAD-9BF8E1980068@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<5F1F09FE-8E86-473A-9BAD-9BF8E1980068@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729d475.Dka3AERdpp94/vhD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:

>
> On Nov 1, 2007, at 02:01, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> >> So why not just create something that runs and call it OpenSolaris  
> >> and then
> > we are done with the confusion.  There are bigger battles to fight  
> > than word
> > games.
>
> I could not agree more with you there, Dennis. We are where we are.  
> And actually, it's pretty good :-)

This did already fit to SchilliX in June 2005.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From me at tomservo.cc  Thu Nov  1 06:23:59 2007
From: me at tomservo.cc (Mario Goebbels)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:23:59 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711010619q3427a08aw59f6f99ffa9149be@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>	
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>	
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>	
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>	
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>	
	<4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	
	<4729CB85.50109@tomservo.cc> <4729CE8F.30703@tomservo.cc>
	<b9c544f0711010619q3427a08aw59f6f99ffa9149be@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4729D36F.1020504@tomservo.cc>

>> I guess the point I was trying to make but forgot to add is that
>> OpenSolaris as baseline compatibility tag is now wasted, unless the
>> naming decision is reverted.
> 
> How so? A name can have multiple meanings as we have already discussed
> so many times before these past weeks.

It's just my opinion that if it's going to be used as compatibility
indicator, there shouldn't be a distro called like it. Unless it's
explicitely called "OpenSolaris Reference Distro".

-mg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071101/958a6957/attachment.bin>

From james.d.carlson at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 06:35:24 2007
From: james.d.carlson at Sun.COM (James Carlson)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 09:35:24 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

John Plocher writes:
> Martin Bochnig wrote:
> > If you want to be FullyOpen, then you may have to accept this.
> 
> Being a FullyOpen community member, I accept that others in the
> FullyOpen community may do things to which I disagree. FullyOpen
> does not mean "everyone has a veto".  It also does not mean "every
> decision is made by consensus".  Sometimes people see a need, and
> go on and fill it, whether or not others agree with them...

I completely agree with that.  Not every decision needs to be made by
consensus or by community-wide voting.

The distinction that I hear many drawing here is that the OpenSolaris
community itself naturally has an interest in the use of the term
"OpenSolaris."  Obviously, it doesn't (and technically can't) own the
trademark, and thus can't dictate its use, but the application of that
mark *does* affect all contributors.

For instance, one direct effect is that prior to Indiana, a project
was "in OpenSolaris" if it went through the established community
endorsement process, and no other change was needed.  Now that
"OpenSolaris" is a distribution, the Indiana project team gets to pick
and choose among other projects to be granted "OpenSolaris" inclusion,
and needn't take the work product of all of them -- or could even
modify ("hack") some as part of constructing the distribution.

Perhaps there's every intent to take the kitchen sink unmodified
... even though I strongly doubt that's technically possible when
there are conflicts (postfix or sendmail?).  However, it's well within
the distributor's prerogative to determine what's "in" and what's
"out."  And that's a significant change for the community.

Given that this issue affects all, that makes the issue special.  It's
rather different from (say) creating a new distribution with an
arbitrary name, or designing a new packaging system.

Avoiding the insistence that there is only one "real OpenSolaris
distribution" fixes those conflicts definitively, though I can see why
the Indiana proponents don't want that result.  As an alternative,
putting the issue to a community-wide vote would also decide the issue
(though perhaps result in more unwanted division).  Simply driving on
from the crash scene, though, sounds likely to produce trouble.

-- 
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


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 06:56:10 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:56:10 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729D36F.1020504@tomservo.cc>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729CB85.50109@tomservo.cc> <4729CE8F.30703@tomservo.cc>
	<b9c544f0711010619q3427a08aw59f6f99ffa9149be@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729D36F.1020504@tomservo.cc>
Message-ID: <4729dafa.2Q2lYy19F4+armof%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Mario Goebbels <me at tomservo.cc> wrote:

> >> I guess the point I was trying to make but forgot to add is that
> >> OpenSolaris as baseline compatibility tag is now wasted, unless the
> >> naming decision is reverted.
> > 
> > How so? A name can have multiple meanings as we have already discussed
> > so many times before these past weeks.
>
> It's just my opinion that if it's going to be used as compatibility
> indicator, there shouldn't be a distro called like it. Unless it's
> explicitely called "OpenSolaris Reference Distro".

An "OpenSolaris Reference Distro" cannot be a distro intended for real use
as an "OpenSolaris Reference Distro" needs to miss all additional software 
to allow a verification against the reference.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 07:05:55 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:05:55 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Message-ID: <529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 13:35, James Carlson wrote:

> For instance, one direct effect is that prior to Indiana, a project
> was "in OpenSolaris" if it went through the established community
> endorsement process, and no other change was needed.  Now that
> "OpenSolaris" is a distribution, the Indiana project team gets to pick
> and choose among other projects to be granted "OpenSolaris" inclusion,
> and needn't take the work product of all of them -- or could even
> modify ("hack") some as part of constructing the distribution.

I don't agree with that. Prior to the start of the current trademark  
discussions, there was only a fair-use right for /anything/ to  
associate itself with OpenSolaris. That right can't be taken away.  
It's up to us to work together to make the trademark guideline[1]  
what we want it to be (while making sure that the people with  
responsibility in law for the trademark are able to approve it).

It's an opportunity to do a new thing collectively and I'm hoping all  
the stop-energy I've seen today will soon change into do-energy. We  
have the "running code" (in both the alpha release and the name),  
it's time to iterate.

S.

     We reject: kings, presidents and voting.
     We believe in: rough consensus and running code.
             -- David Clark, http://ietf20.isoc.org/videos/ 
future_ietf_92.pdf, p.19

[1] http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php? 
title=Trademark_usage_and_Branding_guideline


From alan.coopersmith at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 07:09:43 2007
From: alan.coopersmith at sun.com (Alan Coopersmith)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 07:09:43 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> 
>> Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
>> more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
>> includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
>> Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.
> 
> A really comparison. Try to find out how hard it was to include ksh93 and 
> that star is still not in!

star is still not in simply because no one wants it badly enough to do
the work, while ksh93 is in because Roland wanted it enough to do it.

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 07:17:05 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:17:05 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersmith at sun.com> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
> >> more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
> >> includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
> >> Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.
> > 
> > A really comparison. Try to find out how hard it was to include ksh93 and 
> > that star is still not in!
>
> star is still not in simply because no one wants it badly enough to do
> the work, while ksh93 is in because Roland wanted it enough to do it.

Could you explain this?

Your claim does not look to be correct.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 07:20:11 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:20:11 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
	<4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <200711011420.lA1EKBHI015290@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>



>Could you explain this?
>
>Your claim does not look to be correct.


So: who is doing the work on star?  Where is the project page?
Is there an OpenSolaris ready tarbal people can test?

Casper



From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 06:48:43 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:48:43 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <13E72BB6-3AE3-4121-9AB1-0EAC9BBC520A@sun.com>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<47293492.9040604@sun.com> <47296158.1020806@sun.com>
	<4729BC4F.10705@sun.com> <4729C7D2.3050702@sun.com>
	<4729CC89.4010507@sun.com>
	<13E72BB6-3AE3-4121-9AB1-0EAC9BBC520A@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729D93B.4070703@sun.com>

Simon Phipps wrote:

>> If someone has something concrete, can we please have a page set up and
>> the link widely disseminated?  Ta.
> 
> http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php?title=Trademark_usage_and_Branding_guideline 

That's what I suspected was being referred to, but I wasn't sure.

>     We reject: kings, presidents and voting.
>     We believe in: rough consensus and running code.
>             -- David Clark, 
> http://ietf20.isoc.org/videos/future_ietf_92.pdf, p.19

Oh goody, I like quotations:

The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a 
democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you 
don't have to waste your time voting.
Charles Bukowski (1920 - 1994)

The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the 
votes decide everything.
Joseph Stalin (1879 - 1953)

Vote early and vote often.
Al Capone (1899 - 1947)

-- 
Alan Burlison
--


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 07:22:14 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:22:14 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711011420.lA1EKBHI015290@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
	<4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011420.lA1EKBHI015290@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729e116.s6/In0nHQBoBb0Yb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:

>
>
> >Could you explain this?
> >
> >Your claim does not look to be correct.
>
>
> So: who is doing the work on star?  Where is the project page?
> Is there an OpenSolaris ready tarbal people can test?

This seem to be strange questions!

Did you ever fetch star and compile it?
Did you ever test star?

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 07:26:17 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:26:17 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729e116.s6/In0nHQBoBb0Yb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
	<4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011420.lA1EKBHI015290@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4729e116.s6/In0nHQBoBb0Yb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <200711011426.lA1EQHFD016765@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>


>Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> >Could you explain this?
>> >
>> >Your claim does not look to be correct.
>>
>>
>> So: who is doing the work on star?  Where is the project page?
>> Is there an OpenSolaris ready tarbal people can test?
>
>This seem to be strange questions!
>
>Did you ever fetch star and compile it?
>Did you ever test star?

Where is the version of star which is:

	fully integrated in OpenSolaris (e.g., on the SFW or ON tree)
	fully compatible with tar?

Long before Roland did the work for ksh93 you could download and run it;
but the steps to integrate star have not been taken.

Casper



From james.d.carlson at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 07:18:37 2007
From: james.d.carlson at sun.com (James Carlson)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:18:37 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
Message-ID: <18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

Simon Phipps writes:
> On Nov 1, 2007, at 13:35, James Carlson wrote:
> 
> > For instance, one direct effect is that prior to Indiana, a project
> > was "in OpenSolaris" if it went through the established community
> > endorsement process, and no other change was needed.  Now that
> > "OpenSolaris" is a distribution, the Indiana project team gets to pick
> > and choose among other projects to be granted "OpenSolaris" inclusion,
> > and needn't take the work product of all of them -- or could even
> > modify ("hack") some as part of constructing the distribution.
> 
> I don't agree with that. Prior to the start of the current trademark  
> discussions, there was only a fair-use right for /anything/ to  
> associate itself with OpenSolaris. That right can't be taken away.  
> It's up to us to work together to make the trademark guideline[1]  
> what we want it to be (while making sure that the people with  
> responsibility in law for the trademark are able to approve it).

I think you're missing the point I'm making.  The Indiana project
functions as a WOS -- as a distributor.  As such, it can make
inclusion decisions about other projects that others cannot make (or
even challenge), and its decisions affect what is included as the
"reference" for OpenSolaris.

That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change, without
regard to the trademark legal issues.

> It's an opportunity to do a new thing collectively and I'm hoping all  
> the stop-energy I've seen today will soon change into do-energy. We  
> have the "running code" (in both the alpha release and the name),  
> it's time to iterate.

Again, I think that's a misunderstanding.  Nobody is emitting
"stop-energy" (whatever the heck that might be).  Instead, they're
asking that the folks using the community-wide name actually get the
endorsement of the community that's affected by that usage -- that is,
all of OpenSolaris.

Alternatives include simply changing the name to "Sun's OpenSolaris"
or "Indiana" to make it clear that the wider community isn't intended
to be subject to this project team's decisions.

None of this says "stop," so I just don't agree with your assertions.

-- 
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


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 07:28:14 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:28:14 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711011426.lA1EQHFD016765@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
	<4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011420.lA1EKBHI015290@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4729e116.s6/In0nHQBoBb0Yb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011426.lA1EQHFD016765@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729e27e.0oOF3E5cguXHaExg%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:

> >This seem to be strange questions!
> >
> >Did you ever fetch star and compile it?
> >Did you ever test star?
>
> Where is the version of star which is:
>
> 	fully integrated in OpenSolaris (e.g., on the SFW or ON tree)
> 	fully compatible with tar?
>
> Long before Roland did the work for ksh93 you could download and run it;
> but the steps to integrate star have not been taken.

Where is a documentation on how to integrate?

SFW uses a strange makefilesystem that as very limited and does not seem to 
allow do what's needed.

Send a description that is correct and complete anough and it should take 5 
minutes.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 07:33:28 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:33:28 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL> 
Message-ID: <200711011433.lA1EXSaZ018622@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>



>I think you're missing the point I'm making.  The Indiana project
>functions as a WOS -- as a distributor.  As such, it can make
>inclusion decisions about other projects that others cannot make (or
>even challenge), and its decisions affect what is included as the
>"reference" for OpenSolaris.

And seemingly without any oversight, architecture review, etc, etc.

>That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change, without
>regard to the trademark legal issues.

Indeed.

>Alternatives include simply changing the name to "Sun's OpenSolaris"
>or "Indiana" to make it clear that the wider community isn't intended
>to be subject to this project team's decisions.
>
>None of this says "stop," so I just don't agree with your assertions.

No, it just says "rename".

Casper



From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 07:35:09 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:35:09 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Message-ID: <3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 14:18, James Carlson wrote:

> That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change, without
> regard to the trademark legal issues.

Only if we sit around and leave it as-is. You're speaking as if all  
decisions are made and final. That's not so. There's a stake in the  
ground, for sure, but we all have shovels.

>
>> It's an opportunity to do a new thing collectively and I'm hoping all
>> the stop-energy I've seen today will soon change into do-energy. We
>> have the "running code" (in both the alpha release and the name),
>> it's time to iterate.
>
> Again, I think that's a misunderstanding.  Nobody is emitting
> "stop-energy" (whatever the heck that might be).

I think you'll find they are.
http://www.userland.com/whatIsStopEnergy

S.


From james.d.carlson at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 07:38:56 2007
From: james.d.carlson at sun.com (James Carlson)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:38:56 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
Message-ID: <18217.58624.150995.577331@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

Simon Phipps writes:
> 
> On Nov 1, 2007, at 14:18, James Carlson wrote:
> 
> > That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change, without
> > regard to the trademark legal issues.
> 
> Only if we sit around and leave it as-is. You're speaking as if all  
> decisions are made and final. That's not so. There's a stake in the  
> ground, for sure, but we all have shovels.

Great!  Then you're a proponent of having this discussion ...

> >> It's an opportunity to do a new thing collectively and I'm hoping all
> >> the stop-energy I've seen today will soon change into do-energy. We
> >> have the "running code" (in both the alpha release and the name),
> >> it's time to iterate.
> >
> > Again, I think that's a misunderstanding.  Nobody is emitting
> > "stop-energy" (whatever the heck that might be).
> 
> I think you'll find they are.
> http://www.userland.com/whatIsStopEnergy

... except that you're not.  Wow, that's confusing.

-- 
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


From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 07:53:41 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:53:41 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <18217.58624.150995.577331@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<18217.58624.150995.577331@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Message-ID: <4CF8FCE1-FE81-4D83-8E40-0F8AACF5A93B@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 14:38, James Carlson wrote:

> Simon Phipps writes:
>>
>> On Nov 1, 2007, at 14:18, James Carlson wrote:
>>
>>> That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change,  
>>> without
>>> regard to the trademark legal issues.
>>
>> Only if we sit around and leave it as-is. You're speaking as if all
>> decisions are made and final. That's not so. There's a stake in the
>> ground, for sure, but we all have shovels.
>
> Great!  Then you're a proponent of having this discussion

I am, yes, although I prefer to see positive proposals that build on  
where we are now. That doesn't include "fait accomplis I can do  
nothing" comments, nor does it include "barbarians have taken the  
town let's fall back to the castle" approaches which I classify as  
"stop-energy" and try (with limited success) to ignore :-)

S.



From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 07:54:59 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:54:59 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>

Simon Phipps wrote:

>> That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change, without
>> regard to the trademark legal issues.
> 
> Only if we sit around and leave it as-is. You're speaking as if all  
> decisions are made and final. That's not so. There's a stake in the  
> ground, for sure, but we all have shovels.

Assertions about nothing being final are meaningless if we have no plan 
or proposal to move forwards on.

I'd therefore suggest that a deadline is set of 2 weeks for preparing a 
proposal and associated plan to be put to the OpenSolaris community at 
large.  The Advocacy Community and the Trademark and Branding Project 
are to be responsible for producing the proposal, and that when it is 
complete the OGB will make a decision on whether or not requires 
ratification by the whole community by a formal vote.

That's a clear, concrete proposal for how we can move forward.

-- 
Alan Burlison
--


From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:13:55 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:13:55 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 14:54, Alan Burlison wrote:

> Simon Phipps wrote:
>
>>> That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change,  
>>> without
>>> regard to the trademark legal issues.
>>
>> Only if we sit around and leave it as-is. You're speaking as if all
>> decisions are made and final. That's not so. There's a stake in the
>> ground, for sure, but we all have shovels.
>
> Assertions about nothing being final are meaningless if we have no  
> plan
> or proposal to move forwards on.
>
> I'd therefore suggest that a deadline is set of 2 weeks for  
> preparing a
> proposal and associated plan to be put to the OpenSolaris community at
> large.  The Advocacy Community and the Trademark and Branding Project
> are to be responsible for producing the proposal, and that when it is
> complete the OGB will make a decision on whether or not requires
> ratification by the whole community by a formal vote.
>
> That's a clear, concrete proposal for how we can move forward.

Sounds a device calculated to lead to an early "no" vote to me -  
reminds me of an earlier controversy.

While developing a proposal now is a positive thing to do, I suggest  
waiting until closer to when we actually need a decision (which would  
be the middle of next year) before we try to crystalise a veto like  
that. We may find our attitudes have changed. If they haven't - well,  
fair enough.

S.

     We reject: kings, presidents and voting.
     We believe in: rough consensus and running code.
             -- David Clark, http://ietf20.isoc.org/videos/ 
future_ietf_92.pdf, p.19



From alan.coopersmith at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:17:04 2007
From: alan.coopersmith at sun.com (Alan Coopersmith)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 08:17:04 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729EDF0.3010707@sun.com>

Simon Phipps wrote:
> While developing a proposal now is a positive thing to do, I suggest  
> waiting until closer to when we actually need a decision (which would  
> be the middle of next year) before we try to crystalise a veto like  
> that. We may find our attitudes have changed. If they haven't - well,  
> fair enough.

Middle of next year seems too late with the Indiana schedule to release
the official OpenSolaris distro in March, as is now plastered across the
http://opensolaris.org/ main page.

I agree two weeks seems arbitrarily short, but given the timelines,
think that December/January-ish is about as late as we can push it
unless Indiana agrees to choose another name for it's March release.

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 08:20:48 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 08:20:48 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> You make an important mistake here: Indiana is not a community initated 
> distro but a _Sun_ initiated one.

You keep asserting this, as if anything done with or by people working
for Sun has no validity.

Bullshit.

If 95% of the people working on opensolaris things are Sun Employees,
then (in your perspective) 95% of the things done here aren't
community efforts.  Hey, we are OpenSolaris Community members also!

> SchilliX was the first community initiaded OpenSolaris distro but Sun
> did not like to help with this distro.

I'd say, rather, that Sun had its hands full with launching the whole
opensolaris effort, and didn't have the time, resources, connections
to the right people and/or legal ability to do the things needed to
make Schillix happen.  Transforming that complexity into a disparaging
"Sun did not like to help" is a  bit much.

   -John


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 08:25:55 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 08:25:55 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729bd91.szT6awFdpzK5sHcj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com> <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311501210.1623@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<4728E2B9.9080202@sun.com>
	<E1D63AE8-35FC-4A69-B1B5-AC484A3D8171@sun.com>
	<4729bd91.szT6awFdpzK5sHcj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <4729F003.9060704@Sun.Com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> So you like to call SchilliX OpenSolaris?


Absolutely yes - one of my objectives in this branding effort is to
find a way to allow this (or something similar).

   -John


From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:27:25 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:27:25 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <20071101151337.GB417426@eng.sun.com>
References: <b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com> <20071101151337.GB417426@eng.sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729F05D.6050509@sun.com>

Bryan Cantrill wrote:

> I can't bring myself to utter "+1" -- only beause I find it to be a lazy
> way of expression -- but I strongly agree with this proposal.  The only
> thing I would add is that if the OGB decides not to put it to a formal
> community-wide vote that the proposal be ratified or rejected by the OGB
> itself.

Agreed, I should have been more explicit and put that in.  We elected 
the OGB to be the voice of the community, it seems right that they 
should be given the power to act in that role in this case.

-- 
Alan Burlison
--


From Marty.Duey at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 08:32:44 2007
From: Marty.Duey at Sun.COM (Marty Duey)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 09:32:44 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729F003.9060704@Sun.Com>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com> <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311501210.1623@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<4728E2B9.9080202@sun.com>
	<E1D63AE8-35FC-4A69-B1B5-AC484A3D8171@sun.com>
	<4729bd91.szT6awFdpzK5sHcj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729F003.9060704@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <4729F19C.1020406@sun.com>

On 11/1/2007 9:25 AM, John Plocher wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> 
>>So you like to call SchilliX OpenSolaris?
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely yes - one of my objectives in this branding effort is to
> find a way to allow this (or something similar).
> 
>    -John
Once (and if), of course, SchilliX is derived from whatever constitutes 
the eventual OpenSolaris disto.

Marty Duey



From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:35:09 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:35:09 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729F003.9060704@Sun.Com>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com> <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311501210.1623@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<4728E2B9.9080202@sun.com>
	<E1D63AE8-35FC-4A69-B1B5-AC484A3D8171@sun.com>
	<4729bd91.szT6awFdpzK5sHcj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729F003.9060704@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <F733236F-1D82-46C5-8D76-B7F525B66482@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 15:25, John Plocher wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> So you like to call SchilliX OpenSolaris?
>
>
> Absolutely yes - one of my objectives in this branding effort is to
> find a way to allow this (or something similar).

+1.  We just have to make sure our proposal is one fiduciaries are  
able to approve.

S.



From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:37:41 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:37:41 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729F2C5.1090602@sun.com>

Simon Phipps wrote:

> Sounds a device calculated to lead to an early "no" vote to me - reminds 
> me of an earlier controversy.

And this sounds like exactly the same argument that you tried to use in 
that case to avoid bringing the issue to some sort of resolution, and as 
a result it rumbled on and on.  If I was being suspicious I'd say that 
your position is a device calculated to avoid putting an issue to the 
vote that you suspect it might go the 'wrong way' - but I'm sure I am 
maligning you, in which case you have my profuse apologies.  But then 
again, accusing me of wanting to bias the vote when I've stated that I 
will support whatever decision the OGB and/or community seems slightly 
unfair too.

> While developing a proposal now is a positive thing to do, I suggest 
> waiting until closer to when we actually need a decision (which would be 
> the middle of next year) before we try to crystalise a veto like that. 
> We may find our attitudes have changed. If they haven't - well, fair 
> enough.

No.  We need a decision before then.  2 weeks may be too short, 6 months 
is way too long.

-- 
Alan Burlison
--


From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:38:23 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:38:23 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729EDF0.3010707@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729EDF0.3010707@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729F2EF.1010005@sun.com>

Alan Coopersmith wrote:

> I agree two weeks seems arbitrarily short, but given the timelines,
> think that December/January-ish is about as late as we can push it
> unless Indiana agrees to choose another name for it's March release.

My post was a proposal, a stake in the ground - no more no less.  If 
there's a better suggestion, I'm all for it.

-- 
Alan Burlison
--


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 08:40:37 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:40:37 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729F2C5.1090602@sun.com> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729F2C5.1090602@sun.com> 
Message-ID: <200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>



>No.  We need a decision before then.  2 weeks may be too short, 6 months 
>is way too long.


Since "a distro named OpenSolaris" is out now, I'd +1 sooner rather than
later.

Casper



From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:49:22 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:49:22 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4729F582.7070708@sun.com>

Alan Burlison wrote:

> I'd therefore suggest that a deadline is set of 2 weeks for preparing a 
> proposal and associated plan to be put to the OpenSolaris community at 
> large.  The Advocacy Community and the Trademark and Branding Project 
> are to be responsible for producing the proposal, and that when it is 
> complete the OGB will make a decision on whether or not requires 
> ratification by the whole community by a formal vote.

In case it isn't clear, the proposal I'm referring to can be found at:

http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php?title=Trademark_usage_and_Branding_guideline

-- 
Alan Burlison
--


From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:49:41 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:49:41 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729F19C.1020406@sun.com>
References: <7807934.1193817965831.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
	<47285384.60905@sun.com> <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311045460.9343@vgn-bx640p>
	<4728C809.30304@sun.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311355570.1305@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311501210.1623@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<4728E2B9.9080202@sun.com>
	<E1D63AE8-35FC-4A69-B1B5-AC484A3D8171@sun.com>
	<4729bd91.szT6awFdpzK5sHcj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729F003.9060704@Sun.Com> <4729F19C.1020406@sun.com>
Message-ID: <AB6A59FA-216F-4383-AEFA-1CA3CE9CA195@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 15:32, Marty Duey wrote:

> On 11/1/2007 9:25 AM, John Plocher wrote:
>
>> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>
>>> So you like to call SchilliX OpenSolaris?
>>
>>
>>
>> Absolutely yes - one of my objectives in this branding effort is to
>> find a way to allow this (or something similar).
>>
>>    -John
> Once (and if), of course, SchilliX is derived from whatever  
> constitutes
> the eventual OpenSolaris disto.

... assuming that's what we include as the usage benchmark.

S.



From bmc at eng.sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:13:40 2007
From: bmc at eng.sun.com (Bryan Cantrill)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 08:13:40 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
References: <b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <20071101151337.GB417426@eng.sun.com>


> >> That's a significant community-wide power.  It's a big change, without
> >> regard to the trademark legal issues.
> > 
> > Only if we sit around and leave it as-is. You're speaking as if all  
> > decisions are made and final. That's not so. There's a stake in the  
> > ground, for sure, but we all have shovels.
> 
> Assertions about nothing being final are meaningless if we have no plan 
> or proposal to move forwards on.
> 
> I'd therefore suggest that a deadline is set of 2 weeks for preparing a 
> proposal and associated plan to be put to the OpenSolaris community at 
> large.  The Advocacy Community and the Trademark and Branding Project 
> are to be responsible for producing the proposal, and that when it is 
> complete the OGB will make a decision on whether or not requires 
> ratification by the whole community by a formal vote.

I can't bring myself to utter "+1" -- only beause I find it to be a lazy
way of expression -- but I strongly agree with this proposal.  The only
thing I would add is that if the OGB decides not to put it to a formal
community-wide vote that the proposal be ratified or rejected by the OGB
itself.

Personally, I find it unfortunate that the Indiana project has elected to
take a divisive path in terms of their nomenclature (and yes, nomenclature
is very, very important), but I would like to see us move on, one way or
another...

	- Bryan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan Cantrill, Sun Microsystems FishWorks.       http://blogs.sun.com/bmc


From sommerfeld at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:24:17 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:24:17 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss]
	[osol-discuss]	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1193930657.1961.41.camel@localhost>

On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 15:13 +0000, Simon Phipps wrote:
> > That's a clear, concrete proposal for how we can move forward.
> 
> Sounds a device calculated to lead to an early "no" vote to me -  

In the absence of a policy, it's premature for sun to continue
distributing something calling itself the "OpenSolaris Developer
Preview". 

Let me be clear: I think it's good that the code is out there but IMHO
the name chosen is at best premature.

You quote Dave Clark's statement:

     We reject: kings, presidents and voting.
     We believe in: rough consensus and running code.

By IETF standards, we do not have rough consensus on the name.  detach
the name from the code and we'll be in far better shape.

					- Bill



From darkjoker at gmail.com  Thu Nov  1 08:43:16 2007
From: darkjoker at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ignacio_Marambio_Cat=E1n?=)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:43:16 -0300
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729F2C5.1090602@sun.com>
	<200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <ea5e1eee0711010843x4054e860tadc73aca1b1667f4@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/1/07, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
>
>
> >No.  We need a decision before then.  2 weeks may be too short, 6 months
> >is way too long.
>
>
> Since "a distro named OpenSolaris" is out now, I'd +1 sooner rather than
> later.
i'd say it is already late

nacho


From Darren.Moffat at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 09:03:21 2007
From: Darren.Moffat at Sun.COM (Darren J Moffat)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:03:21 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] how to add to SFW
In-Reply-To: <4729e27e.0oOF3E5cguXHaExg%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
	<4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011420.lA1EKBHI015290@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4729e116.s6/In0nHQBoBb0Yb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011426.lA1EQHFD016765@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4729e27e.0oOF3E5cguXHaExg%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <4729F8C9.4080502@Sun.COM>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
> 
>>> This seem to be strange questions!
>>>
>>> Did you ever fetch star and compile it?
>>> Did you ever test star?
>> Where is the version of star which is:
>>
>> 	fully integrated in OpenSolaris (e.g., on the SFW or ON tree)
>> 	fully compatible with tar?
>>
>> Long before Roland did the work for ksh93 you could download and run it;
>> but the steps to integrate star have not been taken.
> 
> Where is a documentation on how to integrate?
> 
> SFW uses a strange makefilesystem that as very limited and does not seem to 
> allow do what's needed.

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/sfwnv/

In the documentation section.

-- 
Darren J Moffat


From nils.nieuwejaar at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 08:56:09 2007
From: nils.nieuwejaar at sun.com (Nils Nieuwejaar)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 11:56:09 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
References: <47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
Message-ID: <20071101155609.GA4329@east.sun.com>

On Thu 11/01/07 at 15:13 PM, webmink at sun.com wrote:
> 
> While developing a proposal now is a positive thing to do, I suggest  
> waiting until closer to when we actually need a decision (which would  
> be the middle of next year) before we try to crystalise a veto like  
> that. We may find our attitudes have changed. If they haven't - well,  
> fair enough.

We needed a decision yesterday - before the release of the distro.

Waiting 6 months before making a decision doesn't make any sense at all.
At that point, the argument will be: "We've been calling it OpenSolaris for
6 months and everybody knows it by that name, so we can't possibly change
it now." 

Nils


From johnsonnenschein at gmail.com  Thu Nov  1 09:37:28 2007
From: johnsonnenschein at gmail.com (John Sonnenschein)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 09:37:28 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Trust: Trademark, Sun and the Community
Message-ID: <28F0A367-14CC-4ECB-B7D5-085AA8AAAF5C@gmail.com>

When the OpenSolaris project started a few years ago Sun, while the
legal owner of the OpenSolaris trademark, was trusted to be a good
steward to that intellectual property, and was trusted not to do
things with it without consultation.

Recently, as we all know, Ian Murdock et. al. betrayed that trust and
stabbed the community in the back. This unilateral decision has caused
much Sun <-> Community and inter-community hostility.

I propose that we as a community implore Sun to hold a vote on the
issue, open to all contributors and core contributors. While Sun isn't
legally bound to follow the results of the vote, it shall be seen as a
hostile attack on the community values should they ignore it again.

Note that this is quite aside from how I or anyone else feels with
respect to the name. I'm not asking for the name "OpenSolaris" to be
attached to the indiana project or the contrary, I'm asking the OGB,
whose job it is to stand up for the community to urge Sun to hold a
vote, and Sun to hold that vote and act in good faith by following it.

Thank you.

-John


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 09:31:57 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:31:57 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] how to add to SFW
In-Reply-To: <4729F8C9.4080502@Sun.COM>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729c49d.AVFWGN6AkSiriRAm%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729DE27.5090004@sun.com>
	<4729dfe1.Ffq+xZQvk+kPm3LI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011420.lA1EKBHI015290@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4729e116.s6/In0nHQBoBb0Yb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<200711011426.lA1EQHFD016765@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4729e27e.0oOF3E5cguXHaExg%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729F8C9.4080502@Sun.COM>
Message-ID: <4729ff7d.qU1PyIP27zKSy3JC%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Darren J Moffat <Darren.Moffat at Sun.COM> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
> > 
> >>> This seem to be strange questions!
> >>>
> >>> Did you ever fetch star and compile it?
> >>> Did you ever test star?
> >> Where is the version of star which is:
> >>
> >> 	fully integrated in OpenSolaris (e.g., on the SFW or ON tree)
> >> 	fully compatible with tar?
> >>
> >> Long before Roland did the work for ksh93 you could download and run it;
> >> but the steps to integrate star have not been taken.
> > 
> > Where is a documentation on how to integrate?
> > 
> > SFW uses a strange makefilesystem that as very limited and does not seem to 
> > allow do what's needed.
>
> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/sfwnv/
>
> In the documentation section.

Are you talking about this:

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/sfwnv/Documents/Build_engine_policy/

I cannot find information on makefile targets and when what gets called.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 09:25:06 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:25:06 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > You make an important mistake here: Indiana is not a community initated 
> > distro but a _Sun_ initiated one.
>
> You keep asserting this, as if anything done with or by people working
> for Sun has no validity.
>
> Bullshit.

Would you please use a less unfriendly wording?


> If 95% of the people working on opensolaris things are Sun Employees,
> then (in your perspective) 95% of the things done here aren't
> community efforts.  Hey, we are OpenSolaris Community members also!
>
> > SchilliX was the first community initiaded OpenSolaris distro but Sun
> > did not like to help with this distro.
>
> I'd say, rather, that Sun had its hands full with launching the whole
> opensolaris effort, and didn't have the time, resources, connections
> to the right people and/or legal ability to do the things needed to
> make Schillix happen.  Transforming that complexity into a disparaging
> "Sun did not like to help" is a  bit much.

People did accuse that I did not try to create a community and for this 
reason, I need to explain that Sun was not interested in such a community.


J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 10:00:53 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:00:53 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Trust: Trademark, Sun and the Community
In-Reply-To: <28F0A367-14CC-4ECB-B7D5-085AA8AAAF5C@gmail.com>
References: <28F0A367-14CC-4ECB-B7D5-085AA8AAAF5C@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711011000s59ffd0a2lc10c25f274ba6700@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/1/07, John Sonnenschein <johnsonnenschein at gmail.com> wrote:
> When the OpenSolaris project started a few years ago Sun, while the
> legal owner of the OpenSolaris trademark, was trusted to be a good
> steward to that intellectual property, and was trusted not to do
> things with it without consultation.
>
> Recently, as we all know, Ian Murdock et. al. betrayed that trust and
> stabbed the community in the back. This unilateral decision has caused
> much Sun <-> Community and inter-community hostility.
>
> I propose that we as a community implore Sun to hold a vote on the
> issue, open to all contributors and core contributors. While Sun isn't
> legally bound to follow the results of the vote, it shall be seen as a
> hostile attack on the community values should they ignore it again.
>
> Note that this is quite aside from how I or anyone else feels with
> respect to the name. I'm not asking for the name "OpenSolaris" to be
> attached to the indiana project or the contrary, I'm asking the OGB,
> whose job it is to stand up for the community to urge Sun to hold a
> vote, and Sun to hold that vote and act in good faith by following it.
>
> Thank you.

It seems that the individual members of the OGB (James Carlson, Alan
Coopersmith, Casper Dik, Glynn Foster, Stephen Lau, Rich Teer, Keith
Wesolowski) are for the most part  publicly expressing their
disapproval of what has transpired.

(Glynn Foster, and Rich Teer haven't made public their views).

At this point, it seems likely that the OGB will take action of some
sort, as 5 of the 7 members have expressed disapproval of Sun making
arbitrary decisions and actions that affect their community. At this
point they are publicly discussing the idea of holding a vote.

My suggestion would be for the OGB to that officially request that Sun
stop arbitrarily using the OpenSolaris trademark, before reaching
agreement with the community about usage. After which they would
coordinate a community wide vote, on the issue.

-Brian

P.S. - OGB-DISCUSS BCC'ed

> -John
> _______________________________________________
> trademark-policy-dev mailing list
> trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev
>


-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 11:15:15 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:15:15 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] screwdrivers - Re: [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level 
> of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".

The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?

If it is a bug (as I believe), how do we fix it?

If you don't think it is a bug, then we will have to agree to disagree.
I don't believe this disagreement is necessarily fatal to our ability to
work together.

   -John


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Thu Nov  1 11:39:00 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:39:00 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] screwdrivers - Re: [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level 
> > of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".
>
> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?

The OpenSolaris community is not in a fight, so I would like to see
that there is a help on www.opensolaris.org on this topic.

There is more than one distro, so I would like to see something like 
a "get Opensolaris" page that explains the background. We already 
have something similar in the "download" section.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From derek.cicero at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 12:41:18 2007
From: derek.cicero at sun.com (Derek Cicero)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:41:18 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re:
 [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472A2BDE.106@sun.com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
> 
>> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level 
>>> of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".
>> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
>> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?
> 
> The OpenSolaris community is not in a fight, so I would like to see
> that there is a help on www.opensolaris.org on this topic.
> 
> There is more than one distro, so I would like to see something like 
> a "get Opensolaris" page that explains the background. We already 
> have something similar in the "download" section.

Each distro has their own site (many courtesy of Genunix) where they can 
explain the specifics of what they offer in detail. Our downloads page 
has pointers to each of those sites.

I don't think we need to add every distro to the os.org home page 
anymore then we'd put every distro on the Nexenta home page.

Derek
> 
> J?rg
> 


-- 
Derek Cicero
Program Manager
Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 13:22:31 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 16:22:31 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re:
	[osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/1/07, Derek Cicero <derek.cicero at sun.com> wrote:
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
> >
> >> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >>> This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level
> >>> of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".
> >> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
> >> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?
> >
> > The OpenSolaris community is not in a fight, so I would like to see
> > that there is a help on www.opensolaris.org on this topic.
> >
> > There is more than one distro, so I would like to see something like
> > a "get Opensolaris" page that explains the background. We already
> > have something similar in the "download" section.
>
> Each distro has their own site (many courtesy of Genunix) where they can
> explain the specifics of what they offer in detail. Our downloads page
> has pointers to each of those sites.
>
> I don't think we need to add every distro to the os.org home page
> anymore then we'd put every distro on the Nexenta home page.

Why not? Is there something special about Sun's distro, that gives it
the right to sit on the homepage? Is it more functional than the other
distros? More complete? More stable? Or is it that it's just because
it is a "Sun distro" that Sun is implicitly buying advertising space
on the homepage? (And usurping the community's name for it's distro in
the process).

>
> Derek
> >
> > J?rg
> >
>
>
> --
> Derek Cicero
> Program Manager
> Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division
> _______________________________________________
> advocacy-discuss mailing list
> advocacy-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
>


-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 13:28:48 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 15:28:48 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011328p1dd17f7bq2d99c1817f00482d@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
>
> > Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > > You make an important mistake here: Indiana is not a community initated
> > > distro but a _Sun_ initiated one.
> >
> > You keep asserting this, as if anything done with or by people working
> > for Sun has no validity.
> >
> > Bullshit.
>
> Would you please use a less unfriendly wording?
>
>
> > If 95% of the people working on opensolaris things are Sun Employees,
> > then (in your perspective) 95% of the things done here aren't
> > community efforts.  Hey, we are OpenSolaris Community members also!
> >
> > > SchilliX was the first community initiaded OpenSolaris distro but Sun
> > > did not like to help with this distro.
> >
> > I'd say, rather, that Sun had its hands full with launching the whole
> > opensolaris effort, and didn't have the time, resources, connections
> > to the right people and/or legal ability to do the things needed to
> > make Schillix happen.  Transforming that complexity into a disparaging
> > "Sun did not like to help" is a  bit much.
>
> People did accuse that I did not try to create a community and for this
> reason, I need to explain that Sun was not interested in such a community.

Why should Sun have to be interested? You could have proposed
something to the community. Why must Sun be the one to make everything
happen?

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 13:29:45 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 16:29:45 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] screwdrivers - Re: [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711011329td5bd346g13352c32b7e2a935@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/1/07, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level
> > of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".
>
> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?
>
> If it is a bug (as I believe), how do we fix it?

John this reads as if you believe the existence of Nexenta, Shillix,
MartUX and Belenix are bugs? If so, I don't think it's the best way to
get your point across to Joerg. ;)

> If you don't think it is a bug, then we will have to agree to disagree.
> I don't believe this disagreement is necessarily fatal to our ability to
> work together.

John, in our trademark discussions you stated that OpenSolaris should
not be used as a standalone noun. As in Joerg's screwdriver analogy.
Am I missing something.

-Brian

>
>    -John
> _______________________________________________
> trademark-policy-dev mailing list
> trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev

-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From derek.cicero at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 13:42:16 2007
From: derek.cicero at sun.com (Derek Cicero)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:42:16 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 screwdrivers - Re:	 [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and	the OpenSolaris
 name
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
	<5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472A3A28.30604@sun.com>

Brandorr wrote:
> On 11/1/07, Derek Cicero <derek.cicero at sun.com> wrote:
>> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>>>> This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level
>>>>> of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".
>>>> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
>>>> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?
>>> The OpenSolaris community is not in a fight, so I would like to see
>>> that there is a help on www.opensolaris.org on this topic.
>>>
>>> There is more than one distro, so I would like to see something like
>>> a "get Opensolaris" page that explains the background. We already
>>> have something similar in the "download" section.
>> Each distro has their own site (many courtesy of Genunix) where they can
>> explain the specifics of what they offer in detail. Our downloads page
>> has pointers to each of those sites.
>>
>> I don't think we need to add every distro to the os.org home page
>> anymore then we'd put every distro on the Nexenta home page.
> 
> Why not? Is there something special about Sun's distro, that gives it
> the right to sit on the homepage? Is it more functional than the other
> distros? More complete? More stable? Or is it that it's just because
> it is a "Sun distro" that Sun is implicitly buying advertising space
> on the homepage? (And usurping the community's name for it's distro in
> the process).

The point is that each distro has the right and ability to create and 
control their own site. We never said os.org would be the distrowatch 
for all OpenSolaris-related releases. As it stands we've placed all the 
distros on the Downloads page together.

As I mentioned at the summit and on the website-discuss list, once this 
project gets out of the 'preview' phase we'll probably move the 
OpenSolaris distro to a separate mini-site on os.org and revert the old 
/os/ home page back.

Derek

> 
>> Derek
>>> J?rg
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Derek Cicero
>> Program Manager
>> Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division
>> _______________________________________________
>> advocacy-discuss mailing list
>> advocacy-discuss at opensolaris.org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Derek Cicero
Program Manager
Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division


From webmink at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 14:02:37 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:02:37 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 screwdrivers - Re: [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and	the OpenSolaris
 name
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
	<5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <165D1701-33B5-4AC8-8528-282A1F5826DC@sun.com>


On Nov 1, 2007, at 20:22, Brandorr wrote:

>  Sun's distro,

I realise that phrase reflects your viewpoint clearly, but may I  
suggest that using it the way you are to describe the work of the  
Indiana Project continues division rather than healing it?

S.



From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:19:31 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:19:31 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711011519v1af8ac70nd61df6a71e38f068@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/31/07, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
> Martin Bochnig wrote:
> >> This is like calling the automobiles built in the BMW Factory "BMWs".
> >
> > Only when considering the 2nd layer (the distro-creating projects and
> > associated ones, rather than OS/Net src base maintainers).
>
> That is exactly what I am doing.  I'm NOT trying or intending to associate
> the name OpenSolaris with simply the OS/Net src base...
>
> > Then the OS/Net sources should not have the identical name "OpenSolaris"
> > any longer.
>
> Where is the OS/Net consolidation currently being named "opensolaris"?
> I agree with you - if it is, then it should be changed.
>
> The community name is Nevada.  Sometimes spelled "nv"
> The common name is either ON or OS/Net.
> The BFU image is snv_76 or nv_76
> Inside Sun, it was called ON; sometimes "the WOS".
> The name "Solaris" was always used for the complete system that
> was sold to users; Solaris always included a GUI desktop, utilities,
> nameservers, routing and email daemons, etc etc etc.
>
> > If you want to be FullyOpen, then you may have to accept this.
>
> Being a FullyOpen community member, I accept that others in the
> FullyOpen community may do things to which I disagree. FullyOpen
> does not mean "everyone has a veto".  It also does not mean "every
> decision is made by consensus".  Sometimes people see a need, and
> go on and fill it, whether or not others agree with them...
>
> > And honestly: Do you understand / consider the existing distro projects
> > as hostile competition, rather than as (positive, supporting) part (and
> > partially also parts-supplier) of the whole ONE ?
>
> I see them as being positive, value added and supporting alternatives
> to a community that is focused on providing a best-of-breed generalized
> reference distro; however, they are NOT the primary focus or design
> pattern for the majority of the community.
>
> > That's almost pretty much a joke, given that
>
> I thought about using Ford instead of BMW in my analogy, but I didn't
> because I don't like Fords.  I should have, though, because then I
> could have concluded by saying
>
>         Of course, custom car makers like Ferrari, Lotus and
>         Rolls Royce don't consider Ford to be a competitor
>         because their customer base simply doesn't buy Fords.
>
> I consider MartUX, SchilliX and Nexenta to be similar to those
> boutique automobile builders - they are what you install and use
> if you have requirements that are not being met by the Fords of
> the world.  And, you know what?  Many people use Ford or Chevy
> engines in their customized vehicles - Ford is also a pretty
> large parts retailer too.

Now you are telling another $foo distro maker, that all the other $foo
distro makers that they are marginal $foo players. And that only Sun
can make a real $foo distro?

Am I misinterpreting your statement?

>    -John
> _______________________________________________
> indiana-discuss mailing list
> indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
>


-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:36:18 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 17:36:18 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711010939.lA19da6K022901@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711010939.lA19da6K022901@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011536q6bb152ci2758c85b29aa6969@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
> >Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
> >more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
> >includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
> >Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.
>
>
> What bits does Indiana include which are not Sun originated which are
> not also found in say, SXCE?  (I.e., ksh93 and caiman do not count)

That seems like arbitrary criteria. It seems will have to agree to disagree.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:38:59 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 17:38:59 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729b0aa.M60blQMi1s6Ky5kp%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728b413.vPc5vb3r2kgEnl1n%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710311006x6927c8d7m643a4e4d63b6c5b0@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729b0aa.M60blQMi1s6Ky5kp%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011538x7cbc01c1ma8f123ff680586fa@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > On 31/10/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro "OpenSolaris", many people believe
> > > > > that this is the one and only.
> > > >
> > > > I don't believe that for a moment. Going to ubuntu.com only lets me
> > > > download Ubuntu easily; but there are links that go off to other
> > > > places where you can get Kubuntu, Edubuntu, etc. Many people do know
> > > > that other "flavours" of Ubuntu exist.
> > >
> > > With current OpenSolaris distros, we have much more variance in the feeling
> > > than with different ubuntu variants.
> >
> > Which is an interesting tidbit, but doesn't disprove my point.
> >
> > Remember that one of the goals in using the trademark is to set user
> > expectations.
>
> This is simple: just set up a web page that points to all OpenSolaris based
> distributions.
>
> You cannot install "OpenSolaris" but an OpenSolaris based distribution.

Who says? Users seem to think they can. Why do people on OSNews and
Slashdot (before Project Indiana existed) expect to download and
install something called OpenSolaris?

This is precisely why the branding and trademark guidelines discussion
was started; to help set user expectations. Obviously, at the moment,
many user expectations are different than some here.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:39:35 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 17:39:35 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729b142.CqDvqGcM6XGDvYX2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710310944xce8c71ch560635dbcb1112c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B35A.3010900@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0710311007nddd8ea7g8736742279e7a5fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311022k92a8b3asca10fb7e27f7051b@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729b142.CqDvqGcM6XGDvYX2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011539r69c3fd7bj3020d10a50143fab@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > Ubuntu thrived despite Debian's long years of existence.
> >
> > Slackware continues despite RedHat's rise.
> >
> > SUSE continues despite RedHat.
> >
> > Mandraiva continues despite ... etc.
>
> Does Suse claim to publish "Linux"?
> Does Ubuntu claim to publish "Linux"?
> Does Redhat claim to publish "Linux"?
> Does Mandriva claim to publish "Linux"?

That isn't the same. Linux is a kernel; the material provided by
OpenSolaris comprises a complete operating system.


-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:40:14 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 17:40:14 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729b1db.7tSiKivbgUdGzvt1%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<4728b2d9.evG0FRMNz6xTs5xO%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728C22E.8070605@sun.com>
	<4729b1db.7tSiKivbgUdGzvt1%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011540h31e563d9hbc1a1b1c25679868@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> Sara Dornsife <Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM> wrote:
>
> > > As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it.
> > >
> >
> > We have been discussing TM guidelines and usage scenarios for the past
> > two weeks. We are working to create NEW guidelines. Yes, the current
> > (past) guidelines have been restrictive. I'd like to see you work with
> > the rest of us on how to create new guidelines that work better for all
> > distributions.
>
> We had this discussion long ago and we decided that it was a bad idea to allow
> a distribution to use the name OpenSolaris. I do not see anything that would
> change the constraints here.

Who's this mysterious we?

I certainly would never agree to such a thing.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:41:19 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 17:41:19 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729D36F.1020504@tomservo.cc>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<4729c606.Y52eYrN3qgFUU2dY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729CB85.50109@tomservo.cc> <4729CE8F.30703@tomservo.cc>
	<b9c544f0711010619q3427a08aw59f6f99ffa9149be@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729D36F.1020504@tomservo.cc>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011541w4b34ebddg86d958de63ec7086@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Mario Goebbels <me at tomservo.cc> wrote:
> >> I guess the point I was trying to make but forgot to add is that
> >> OpenSolaris as baseline compatibility tag is now wasted, unless the
> >> naming decision is reverted.
> >
> > How so? A name can have multiple meanings as we have already discussed
> > so many times before these past weeks.
>
> It's just my opinion that if it's going to be used as compatibility
> indicator, there shouldn't be a distro called like it. Unless it's
> explicitely called "OpenSolaris Reference Distro".

Which wouldn't help the current situation as people would likely still
be incensed that anyone would dare call themselves OpenSolaris
anything (well at least in the distro name itself). This has echoes of
Nexenta's initial mistake of calling themselves GNU/Solaris.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:43:40 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 17:43:40 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
> > I'd say, rather, that Sun had its hands full with launching the whole
> > opensolaris effort, and didn't have the time, resources, connections
> > to the right people and/or legal ability to do the things needed to
> > make Schillix happen.  Transforming that complexity into a disparaging
> > "Sun did not like to help" is a  bit much.
>
> People did accuse that I did not try to create a community and for this
> reason, I need to explain that Sun was not interested in such a community.

Why should Sun need to be interested? In the last two years you could
have proposed the creation of a distribution community on
opensolaris.org and worked with SchilliX from that as a base.

Joerg, the only reason SchilliX hasn't gone anywhere is because you
and others haven't taken the steps necessary to make that happen.

Please don't take offense at this, I downloaded SchilliX when it first
came out, and even sent you a few bug reports about the readme or some
such thing.

I'm just pointing out that you chose to work outside of the "community
website" and thus were inevitably invisible to anyone that wasn't
already aware of SchilliX through other channels.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:47:23 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:47:23 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711011536q6bb152ci2758c85b29aa6969@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711010939.lA19da6K022901@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711011536q6bb152ci2758c85b29aa6969@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711011547i4c4e95c3mc66ed53cb13b634c@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/1/07, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> On 01/11/2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
> > >Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
> > >more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
> > >includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
> > >Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.
> >
> >
> > What bits does Indiana include which are not Sun originated which are
> > not also found in say, SXCE?  (I.e., ksh93 and caiman do not count)
>
> That seems like arbitrary criteria. It seems will have to agree to disagree.

How about this one. Sun Solaris contains bash, gtar, gzip, etc. Does
that make it not Sun Solaris? RedHat Enterprise Linux, contains bash,
gtar, gzip, etc. Does that not make it *RedHat* Enterprise Linux?

I don't see what there is to disagree about. Making these kinds of
analogies only hurts your credibility. It seems you are making up
arguments to justify your position that OpenSolaris=Indiana, and that
it is not Sun/Ian Murdock/Sun Marketing execs unilaterally making this
decision.

(BTW - Just because you happen to agree with the decision doesn't mean
you are making it either.)

Fact is going into the Summit, I was for it also, but the heavy
handedness of how Sun's OpenSolaris marketing team is handling the
Indiana naming process, has turned me off on the whole idea of
OpenSolaris = Indiana.

Cheers,
Brian

> --
> Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
> http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
>
> "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
> junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
> are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall
> _______________________________________________
> trademark-policy-dev mailing list
> trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev
>


-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 15:58:07 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 17:58:07 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711011547i4c4e95c3mc66ed53cb13b634c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711010939.lA19da6K022901@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711011536q6bb152ci2758c85b29aa6969@mail.gmail.com>
	<5b5090780711011547i4c4e95c3mc66ed53cb13b634c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011558g1a7aad48h479259e67cf3c61c@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> On 11/1/07, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > On 01/11/2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
> > > >Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
> > > >more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
> > > >includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
> > > >Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.
> > >
> > >
> > > What bits does Indiana include which are not Sun originated which are
> > > not also found in say, SXCE?  (I.e., ksh93 and caiman do not count)
> >
> > That seems like arbitrary criteria. It seems will have to agree to disagree.
>
> How about this one. Sun Solaris contains bash, gtar, gzip, etc. Does
> that make it not Sun Solaris? RedHat Enterprise Linux, contains bash,
> gtar, gzip, etc. Does that not make it *RedHat* Enterprise Linux?

Actually, if you ask the FSF. It makes it RedHat *GNU*/Linux <g>

But I digress ;)

> I don't see what there is to disagree about. Making these kinds of
> analogies only hurts your credibility. It seems you are making up

I don't care a whit about credibility. I care about three things:

1) code

2) community

3) progress

Project Indiana has all three as far as I'm concerned. Although I
would have appreciated a vote on the name for #2.

> arguments to justify your position that OpenSolaris=Indiana, and that
> it is not Sun/Ian Murdock/Sun Marketing execs unilaterally making this
> decision.

Because I simply don't believe that. That's what it comes down to.
Your belief and mine just don't coincide. I'm sorry you can't believe
that no one could possibly come to a different conclusion; but I have.

> Fact is going into the Summit, I was for it also, but the heavy
> handedness of how Sun's OpenSolaris marketing team is handling the
> Indiana naming process, has turned me off on the whole idea of
> OpenSolaris = Indiana.

I don't think OpenSolaris == Indiana. I think Indiana is merely a
consoliation of what was already OpenSolaris wrapped up in a pretty
package.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 16:03:56 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:03:56 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] screwdrivers - Re:
	[advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011603mf1e75ap9fa2d3722529d387@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
>
> > Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > > This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level
> > > of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".
> >
> > The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
> > bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?
>
> The OpenSolaris community is not in a fight, so I would like to see
> that there is a help on www.opensolaris.org on this topic.
>
> There is more than one distro, so I would like to see something like
> a "get Opensolaris" page that explains the background. We already
> have something similar in the "download" section.

Sorry Jorg, but users don't want to drown in choices. They shouldn't
need to read six paragraphs explaining what they should download and
why.

We should have an official community distribution that is prominent
and the other ones can be easily gotten to as well.

If people have to read six paragraphs of text before they can do
anything useful; they'll likely just say "this sucks! I'll stick with
Linux!" and go somewhere else.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Thu Nov  1 16:06:19 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:06:19 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	screwdrivers - Re: [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
	<5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711011606g468fbac4y4ca1b99ccf368e8b@mail.gmail.com>

On 01/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> On 11/1/07, Derek Cicero <derek.cicero at sun.com> wrote:
> > Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > > John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > >>> This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level
> > >>> of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris".
> > >> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
> > >> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?
> > >
> > > The OpenSolaris community is not in a fight, so I would like to see
> > > that there is a help on www.opensolaris.org on this topic.
> > >
> > > There is more than one distro, so I would like to see something like
> > > a "get Opensolaris" page that explains the background. We already
> > > have something similar in the "download" section.
> >
> > Each distro has their own site (many courtesy of Genunix) where they can
> > explain the specifics of what they offer in detail. Our downloads page
> > has pointers to each of those sites.
> >
> > I don't think we need to add every distro to the os.org home page
> > anymore then we'd put every distro on the Nexenta home page.
>
> Why not? Is there something special about Sun's distro, that gives it
> the right to sit on the homepage? Is it more functional than the other
> distros? More complete? More stable? Or is it that it's just because
> it is a "Sun distro" that Sun is implicitly buying advertising space
> on the homepage? (And usurping the community's name for it's distro in
> the process).

Ignoring the troll about "Sun's distro"...assuming for a moment that a
voted upon and duly approved community distribution exists, I would
think featuring it prominently (the way Ubuntu does) with links to
"other distributions" somewhere else is most appropriate.

As someone focused on users, I think you of all people would
appreciate users being able to hit "Download" and not have to read
"umpteen" confusing paragraphs before deciding what to download.

Things should be short and to the point; anything less is focusing on
egos and not on users.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 16:44:48 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:44:48 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711011536q6bb152ci2758c85b29aa6969@mail.gmail.com> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711010939.lA19da6K022901@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711011536q6bb152ci2758c85b29aa6969@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-ID: <200711012344.lA1NimGD017342@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>


>On 01/11/2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
>> >Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from
>> >more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it
>> >includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it
>> >Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate.
>>
>>
>> What bits does Indiana include which are not Sun originated which are
>> not also found in say, SXCE?  (I.e., ksh93 and caiman do not count)
>
>That seems like arbitrary criteria. It seems will have to agree to disagree.


Really?  You've called "Solaris/OpenSolaris" stagnant' you have praised
"Indiana community contributions" and when called on this you say
"we'll have to agree to disagree".

Please name two Indiana contributions by community members who are
not part of Sun's project Indiana staff.  I do appreciate that Sun folks
are part of the OpenSolaris community but I also feel that any claims
of "community effort" when it's all a Sun staffed project are dishonest
at best.

Ksh93 is clearly a community effort, but your claim that excluding it from
Indiana is "arbitrary" is misinformed; ksh93 was started long before
Indiana, had nothing to do with Indiana.  It is part of OpenSolaris
just as Indiana is; but it is NOT part of Indiana just as OpenSolaris is
not part of Indiana or OS/Net is not part of Indiana.

Indiana is a distro; as such it contains bits of many other projects;
to claim ownership for Indiana of any of those bits is clearly wrong;
at least in my view of the world.  I think that that is not an arbitrary
distinction; what is contributed by Indiana is not necessarily what is
unique to Indiana but what originates from it.

Casper


From jon at radscan.com  Thu Nov  1 17:05:39 2007
From: jon at radscan.com (Jon Trulson)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:05:39 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>

On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:

> Jon Trulson <jon at radscan.com> wrote:
>
>>> It is obvious that if Sun calls a distro "OpenSolaris", many people believe
>>> that this is the one and only.
>>>
>>
>>    FWIW, as a third party that develops software on Solaris, I would
>>    welcome an 'OpenSolaris Reference' distribution.
>
> This would cause problems too.
>
> It is better to define a binary compatibility guideline and to have a test
> for compatibility. We, the community of people who create distributions
> in addition need to take care that this test is complete enough.
>
> To understand this problem: If I did not push Sun to verify /usr/bin/tar
> against _my_ POSIX compliance test, Sun tar would still not create/read
> POSIX.1-1988 compliant archives although it did pass the OpenGroup tests.
>
>
> Note that if a distribution _adds_ this to the compatibility definitions,
> this would make this distro unsuitable as a reference. For the same reason,
> I need to correct you as I believe that believe that "Sun OpenSolaris" could
> be a reference distribution. "Sun OpenSolaris" would most likely include
> more software than the reference requires and thus make it unsuitable as a
> reference.
>

   As Casper replied previously, defining 'compatibility' is
   non-trivial.  No doubt what I consider 'compatible' might have no
   meaning to a company like adobe, who would have other requirements.

   What I was trying to get across was that one of Solaris's strengths
   is that it is actually designed, implemented, documented, and then
   supported for 'a while', something which is generally alien to Linux.

   As an example, if an OpenSolaris Reference Implementation (OSRI)
   supports package manager 'Coolio', then I would expect other dists
   based on OSRI to also support 'Coolio', even if it also contains
   some other package manager.

   I would like kernel modules and userland binaries compiled on OSRI
   to run, unmodified, on any dist that calls itself based on OSRI.  I
   know this sounds a little silly (and maybe pretty obvious), but for
   any of you that have had to develop and support software on Linux,
   and in particular, the Linux kernel - you know how important this
   stuff is.

> A reference distro has no less _and_ no more than the interface definition
> and grants users that software compiled on that distro to run on any
> other compatible distro.
>

   Well, an OSRI has to be actually *usable* as well...

> J?rg
>
>

-- 
Happy cheese in fear                 | Jon Trulson
against oppressor, rebel!            | mailto:jon at radscan.com 
Brocolli, hostage.       -Unknown    | #include <std/disclaimer.h>

From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 19:47:45 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:47:45 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729F2EF.1010005@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729EDF0.3010707@sun.com> <4729F2EF.1010005@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472A8FD1.10607@Sun.Com>

Alan Burlison wrote:
> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> 
>> I agree two weeks seems arbitrarily short, but given the timelines,
>> think that December/January-ish is about as late as we can push it
>> unless Indiana agrees to choose another name for it's March release.
> 
> My post was a proposal, a stake in the ground - no more no less.  If 
> there's a better suggestion, I'm all for it.

As the instigator of the branding project, I'd love to get to that point
in 2 weeks.  But, I'm not sure the discussion there has managed to
progress beyond the "massive email about past, present and future slights,
omissions and bad behavior" stage and into a serious discussion about
specifics.

At this point, only three or four people (myself included) have made
specific suggestions and/or proposals; they have been incorporated
into the wiki.  Unfortunately, judging from the majority of the
discussion, nobody else has read any of it.

If this doesn't change, I'm unwilling to take my half-baked, decidedly
one-sided perspective and rush it out for a vote as if it was something
that reflected the intent of the community.  It needs to honestly reflect
that intent, not try to dictate it.

And I need y'all to help it become such a proposal.

I'm also unwilling to push this off until Indiana is at the point
where it couldn't be modified to reflect the outcome of a vote; I hate
playing chicken with projects that are trying to game the system.

So, +1, except that your 2 week deadline may need to be something like
in a month; most certainly before the end of the calendar year.

   -John




From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 20:40:56 2007
From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:40:56 +1300
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss]	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472A9C48.6000605@sun.com>



Chris Mahan wrote:
> People's decisions will not be based on the technical merit of each
> distro, after careful examination of the characteristics of each distro
> and based on their need. Rather, they will become Victims of Marketing
> and be funneled into OpenSolaris-that-was-Indiana.
> 
> So, does it harm other distros? In the sense that they will be starved
> for new users, definitely.

Look at the Debian/Ubuntu scenario. You had massive migration across because
Ubuntu worked so well out of the box, and had a very well polished user
experience with good application availability. So I disagree to some extent
unless you have evidence to prove me wrong?


Glynn



From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Thu Nov  1 21:12:12 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:12:12 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711011519v1af8ac70nd61df6a71e38f068@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<5b5090780711011519v1af8ac70nd61df6a71e38f068@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472AA39C.2070806@Sun.Com>

Brandorr wrote:
> Now you are telling another $foo distro maker, that all the other $foo
> distro makers that they are marginal $foo players. And that only Sun
> can make a real $foo distro?
> 
> Am I misinterpreting your statement?

Yes.

I'm trying to say:

I am telling another $foo distro maker that all the $foo distros
are either compatible, derivative or incompatible $foo distross,
as defined by the OpenSolaris community.  In addition, the OpenSolaris
community itself produces a distro that is compatible.

   -John




From rich.teer at rite-group.com  Thu Nov  1 21:34:57 2007
From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729F2C5.1090602@sun.com>
	<200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.64.0711012134470.19906@marrakesh>

On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:

> >No.  We need a decision before then.  2 weeks may be too short, 6 months 
> >is way too long.
> 
> Since "a distro named OpenSolaris" is out now, I'd +1 sooner rather than
> later.

Ditto.

-- 
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member

CEO,
My Online Home Inventory

URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
      http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer
      http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com


From sommerfeld at sun.com  Thu Nov  1 21:41:17 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:41:17 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472AA39C.2070806@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<5b5090780711011519v1af8ac70nd61df6a71e38f068@mail.gmail.com>
	<472AA39C.2070806@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <1193978477.8333.263.camel@thunk>


On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 21:12 -0700, John Plocher wrote:
> I am telling another $foo distro maker that all the $foo distros
> are either compatible, derivative or incompatible $foo distross,
> as defined by the OpenSolaris community.  In addition, the OpenSolaris
> community itself produces a distro that is compatible.

I think "a distro" is unnecessarily constraining.

I would like to hope that the projects in the opensolaris community will
in the fullness of time produce multiple "distros" -- albeit with the
majority being branches very similar to a trunk distribution, and
intended to be merged into the trunk when they're complete.

I think it's healthier for the community to present the current project
indiana release as the first release of a project branch, *not* as
version 0 of the new trunk.

					- Bill








From rich.teer at rite-group.com  Thu Nov  1 21:51:44 2007
From: rich.teer at rite-group.com (Rich Teer)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss]  Trust: Trademark,
 Sun and the Community
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711011000s59ffd0a2lc10c25f274ba6700@mail.gmail.com>
References: <28F0A367-14CC-4ECB-B7D5-085AA8AAAF5C@gmail.com>
	<5b5090780711011000s59ffd0a2lc10c25f274ba6700@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.64.0711012150520.19906@marrakesh>

On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Brandorr wrote:

> It seems that the individual members of the OGB (James Carlson, Alan
> Coopersmith, Casper Dik, Glynn Foster, Stephen Lau, Rich Teer, Keith
> Wesolowski) are for the most part  publicly expressing their
> disapproval of what has transpired.
> 
> (Glynn Foster, and Rich Teer haven't made public their views).

Add my name to the list of public disapprovers.

-- 
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member

CEO,
My Online Home Inventory

URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
      http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer
      http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com


From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 01:36:19 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 08:36:19 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472A8FD1.10607@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729EDF0.3010707@sun.com> <4729F2EF.1010005@sun.com>
	<472A8FD1.10607@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <472AE183.9070203@sun.com>

John Plocher wrote:

> So, +1, except that your 2 week deadline may need to be something like
> in a month; most certainly before the end of the calendar year.

As I said earlier, the 2 weeks was just a proposal, I'm happy to go with 
whatever the community feels is appropriate.  However your proposal is a 
concrete step towards a resolution, no matter how rough you think it is 
at the moment.  Thank you for doing it.

-- 
Alan Burlison
--


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 02:58:53 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:58:53 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711011539r69c3fd7bj3020d10a50143fab@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710310944xce8c71ch560635dbcb1112c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B35A.3010900@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0710311007nddd8ea7g8736742279e7a5fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311022k92a8b3asca10fb7e27f7051b@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729b142.CqDvqGcM6XGDvYX2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011539r69c3fd7bj3020d10a50143fab@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472af4dd.xLPl5faSpsLiu/PA%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Ubuntu thrived despite Debian's long years of existence.
> > >
> > > Slackware continues despite RedHat's rise.
> > >
> > > SUSE continues despite RedHat.
> > >
> > > Mandraiva continues despite ... etc.
> >
> > Does Suse claim to publish "Linux"?
> > Does Ubuntu claim to publish "Linux"?
> > Does Redhat claim to publish "Linux"?
> > Does Mandriva claim to publish "Linux"?
>
> That isn't the same. Linux is a kernel; the material provided by
> OpenSolaris comprises a complete operating system.

Not true: OpenSolaris is not even a complete basic OS.

Guess why I had to work hard to create the SchilliX distribution to make
a bootable environment from the OpenSolaris bits? Also note that the tendency to
replace useland tools by GNU tools let's OpenSolaris approach the Linux idea
of only being a kernel.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From ndo at unikservice.com  Fri Nov  2 03:12:28 2007
From: ndo at unikservice.com (Nicolas Dorfsman)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:12:28 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.4.64.0711012134470.19906@marrakesh>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729F2C5.1090602@sun.com>
	<200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<Pine.SOL.4.64.0711012134470.19906@marrakesh>
Message-ID: <50863D8D-2F95-496A-B770-7786490E741A@unikservice.com>



	

	I have spent more than 1 hours to read all your mails. It's really  
intersting and I'm not sure of what I was expecting from OpenSolaris  
project regarding distros.

	I did got to bed last night with "Indiana name discussion" in mind.

Le 1 nov. 07 ? 03:01, Dennis Clarke a ?crit :

> So why not just create something that runs and call it OpenSolaris  
> and then
> we are done with the confusion.  There are bigger battles to fight  
> than word
> games.


	Sure. But this is really important. I mean, when I try to convince  
people to take a look to OpenSolaris, every word seems to be important.
	It's a fact that many people would be more comfortable if they could  
install "THE OpenSolaris".  But for many other, the word "Sun" like in  
Nevada description is much more important.
	OpenSource geeks would prefer the best world....open....usable....etc

	For sure, when people are saying : "Well, let's try to install  
OpenSolaris", they can't ! And it's a good thing, they have to use  
their mind for 30 seconds and chose a distro...and then they have a  
chance to understand that OpenSolaris is MORE than a distro.
	We must not be able to answer "What is OpenSolaris ?" with "Oh, it's  
just a new distribution, like Mandriva".

	The words "reference distro" is a better concept.
	

Could someone please answer to this simple question :


		Indiana Community distro or Sun distro
		
		I completely agree the fact Sun folks could work on community  
projects, and even if no outside people worked with them, the project  
could be named "community effort". I have no problem with that.     
But, the whole project should be available to the community.
		Concerning Indiana, is it another "Express mouture" with "additional  
technology that has not been published in the OpenSolaris source base"  
or is it a complete community distro ?







	Nicolas Dorfsman
	GUSES member (French speaking OSUG)
	http://www.guses.org
		


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 03:12:03 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:12:03 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<18217.54812.801586.635373@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<529AFEC7-6060-4B8B-9062-E529AD1731C3@sun.com>
	<18217.57405.630470.815096@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<3CD82851-6922-4AC6-A7FB-110608FB10C0@sun.com>
	<4729E8C3.6080205@sun.com>
	<46684286-355D-4C96-A2A0-FF884CABE19D@sun.com>
	<4729F2C5.1090602@sun.com>
	<200711011540.lA1FebMl005390@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <472af7f3.YjVjARGvG3VnbEEC%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:

>
>
> >No.  We need a decision before then.  2 weeks may be too short, 6 months 
> >is way too long.
>
>
> Since "a distro named OpenSolaris" is out now, I'd +1 sooner rather than
> later.

I know of no distro named "OpenSolaris".

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 02:59:46 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:59:46 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711011540h31e563d9hbc1a1b1c25679868@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<4728b2d9.evG0FRMNz6xTs5xO%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728C22E.8070605@sun.com>
	<4729b1db.7tSiKivbgUdGzvt1%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011540h31e563d9hbc1a1b1c25679868@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472af512.Y0b3Z5PzK/sjTbSy%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > Sara Dornsife <Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM> wrote:
> >
> > > > As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > We have been discussing TM guidelines and usage scenarios for the past
> > > two weeks. We are working to create NEW guidelines. Yes, the current
> > > (past) guidelines have been restrictive. I'd like to see you work with
> > > the rest of us on how to create new guidelines that work better for all
> > > distributions.
> >
> > We had this discussion long ago and we decided that it was a bad idea to allow
> > a distribution to use the name OpenSolaris. I do not see anything that would
> > change the constraints here.
>
> Who's this mysterious we?

THe OpenSolaris community. Maybe you have not been in that time.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Tim.Foster at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 03:54:27 2007
From: Tim.Foster at Sun.COM (Tim Foster)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:54:27 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and
	the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472af512.Y0b3Z5PzK/sjTbSy%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<4728b2d9.evG0FRMNz6xTs5xO%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728C22E.8070605@sun.com>
	<4729b1db.7tSiKivbgUdGzvt1%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011540h31e563d9hbc1a1b1c25679868@mail.gmail.com>
	<472af512.Y0b3Z5PzK/sjTbSy%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <1194000867.3845.7.camel@cranialtrauma>

[ can we please drop some of the lists from Cc: I'm getting many copies
of each of these.  I've set Reply-To: to advocacy-discuss, as this has
gone beyond establishing guidelines for the opensolaris brand, as
opposed to discussion about naming a single distribution
"OpenSolaris". ]

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 10:59 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> > > We had this discussion long ago and we decided that it was a bad idea to allow
> > > a distribution to use the name OpenSolaris. I do not see anything that would
> > > change the constraints here.
> >
> > Who's this mysterious we?
> 
> The OpenSolaris community. Maybe you have not been in that time.

But communities priorities change over time: what was true and good for
the community back in 2005 may not be true now - we've all grown up a
lot over the last 2 years, along with our operating system. 

We're hearing the same voices with the same opinions now on this naming
discussion, I'm not sure we're getting anywhere. What's next ?

	cheers,

		tim
-- 
Tim Foster, Sun Microsystems Inc, Solaris Engineering Ops
http://blogs.sun.com/timf



From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 04:34:47 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:34:47 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711011328p1dd17f7bq2d99c1817f00482d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011328p1dd17f7bq2d99c1817f00482d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472b0b57.Qm3oyi9w4WCespuY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> > People did accuse that I did not try to create a community and for this
> > reason, I need to explain that Sun was not interested in such a community.
>
> Why should Sun have to be interested? You could have proposed
> something to the community. Why must Sun be the one to make everything
> happen?

I did try to get help from the community and I did have many discussions
with Sun to no avail. What is your concern?

The problem is that Sun takes working project ideas from the community outside 
Sun and creates internal projects with nearly identical goals. This is something
that causes the main problems in the opensolaris related mailing lists.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 04:45:43 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:45:43 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> Joerg, the only reason SchilliX hasn't gone anywhere is because you
> and others haven't taken the steps necessary to make that happen.

This is definitely not true.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 04:51:59 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:51:59 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] screwdrivers - Re:
 [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711011603mf1e75ap9fa2d3722529d387@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011603mf1e75ap9fa2d3722529d387@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472b0f5f.k4ZHvFdSS7cYmrRn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> We should have an official community distribution that is prominent
> and the other ones can be easily gotten to as well.
>
> If people have to read six paragraphs of text before they can do
> anything useful; they'll likely just say "this sucks! I'll stick with
> Linux!" and go somewhere else.

You are trying to use the same facts for arguing pro and contra the same
issue.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 05:00:49 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:00:49 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
Message-ID: <472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Jon Trulson <jon at radscan.com> wrote:

>    As Casper replied previously, defining 'compatibility' is
>    non-trivial.  No doubt what I consider 'compatible' might have no
>    meaning to a company like adobe, who would have other requirements.

I do not seee new ideas in Caspers text.

>    What I was trying to get across was that one of Solaris's strengths
>    is that it is actually designed, implemented, documented, and then
>    supported for 'a while', something which is generally alien to Linux.
>
>    As an example, if an OpenSolaris Reference Implementation (OSRI)
>    supports package manager 'Coolio', then I would expect other dists
>    based on OSRI to also support 'Coolio', even if it also contains
>    some other package manager.
>
>    I would like kernel modules and userland binaries compiled on OSRI
>    to run, unmodified, on any dist that calls itself based on OSRI.  I
>    know this sounds a little silly (and maybe pretty obvious), but for
>    any of you that have had to develop and support software on Linux,
>    and in particular, the Linux kernel - you know how important this
>    stuff is.

Compatiblitiy is less trivial than you might belive but without conformance 
tests, we cannot claim anything about compatibility of siftware or 
distributions.



> > A reference distro has no less _and_ no more than the interface definition
> > and grants users that software compiled on that distro to run on any
> > other compatible distro.
> >
>
>    Well, an OSRI has to be actually *usable* as well...

I am not sure whether you understand the compatibility problems that arise from 
having _additional_ software that does not belong to the interface definitions.

If you like to compile "compatible" software and prove that it is compatible,
you are not allowed to have _additional_ software in the compile machine.
If you did, the software may depend on these bits without your knowledge.

People tend to install additional software on their development machines and 
people tend not to have these machines in a clean known state. 


A distro alone cannot be a refernce. It must not even be changed for 
the compatibility tests.
J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 05:33:27 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:33:27 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472B15D7.1070401@tomservo.cc> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B15D7.1070401@tomservo.cc> 
Message-ID: <200711021233.lA2CXShE003630@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>


>Obviously, guaranteeing a compatibility baseline for the whole system
>isn't practically possible.

Quite; having a "Reference Distro" to develop on would help, though,
as it allows customers to determine whether an ISV supplied
package works on the reference distro as promised and whether the
issue is unique to their distro or not.

While "standards conformance tests" are nice, the experience with
the Linux Standards Base referenced by Ian in his OGB concall was
"millions spend and not much to show for it".  You can write standards
tests until you are blue in the face, but it does not allow you
to give any form of guarantee that applications which pass the tests
will actually work.  That would also require you to verify that the
application only uses bits covered by the standards tests.

I think that we'll sooner solve the Halting Problem than that.

>What should be made sure is that there's a conformance test where you
>can hand out sort of a e-badge, that tells an user that the kernel
>hasn't been screwed with custom patches (unlike what every major Linux
>distro does). This would be of interest for driver developers.

That's still a hard problem to solve and I think that that is
not where I would expect divergence to occur first and foremost.

I would expect libraries to be missing, be in different locations, have
different versions, different "SONAME"s and that sort of thing; different
version of GNOME etc.

>While I don't expect distro makers doing their own kernel tweaking on
>their distros yet, you have to plan ahead so that this conformance thing
>is in place for the case OpenSolaris actually takes off like the Sun
>management (i.e. JSchwartz, Murdock and cohorts) hopes.

I'm not sure Indiana is the proper place for conformance tests or
a reference distribution; quite the contrary in fact.

Casper


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 05:53:20 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:53:20 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711021233.lA2CXShE003630@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B15D7.1070401@tomservo.cc>
	<200711021233.lA2CXShE003630@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <472b1dc0.nOgwgamGo7BFjhI7%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:

>
> >Obviously, guaranteeing a compatibility baseline for the whole system
> >isn't practically possible.
>
> Quite; having a "Reference Distro" to develop on would help, though,
> as it allows customers to determine whether an ISV supplied
> package works on the reference distro as promised and whether the
> issue is unique to their distro or not.
>
> While "standards conformance tests" are nice, the experience with
> the Linux Standards Base referenced by Ian in his OGB concall was
> "millions spend and not much to show for it".  You can write standards
> tests until you are blue in the face, but it does not allow you
> to give any form of guarantee that applications which pass the tests
> will actually work.  That would also require you to verify that the
> application only uses bits covered by the standards tests.

It depends. For some problems it is hard to write a suffucuent test,
for others it is simple but it may still be missing. Remember that I mentioned
the POSIX.1-1988 archive format test I did write in 2002, it was really 
straightforward but nobody did it before.

If we have no test, we cannot say anything abut compatibility. Is this what you 
prefer?

> That's still a hard problem to solve and I think that that is
> not where I would expect divergence to occur first and foremost.
>
> I would expect libraries to be missing, be in different locations, have
> different versions, different "SONAME"s and that sort of thing; different
> version of GNOME etc.

We need to write down a definition for the compliance and we need to write
tests. It is a nice field where Sun employees may put effort in and if an 
independend distro finds out that other distros do not follow the rules,
their makers could create a test that verifies this non-conformance.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Milan.Jurik at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 01:37:42 2007
From: Milan.Jurik at Sun.COM (Milan Jurik)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 09:37:42 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472AA39C.2070806@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<5b5090780711011519v1af8ac70nd61df6a71e38f068@mail.gmail.com>
	<472AA39C.2070806@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <1193992662.1379.19.camel@xylabthree>

Hi John,

John Plocher p????e v ??t 01. 11. 2007 v 21:12 -0700:
> Brandorr wrote:
> > Now you are telling another $foo distro maker, that all the other $foo
> > distro makers that they are marginal $foo players. And that only Sun
> > can make a real $foo distro?
> > 
> > Am I misinterpreting your statement?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I'm trying to say:
> 
> I am telling another $foo distro maker that all the $foo distros
> are either compatible, derivative or incompatible $foo distross,
> as defined by the OpenSolaris community.  In addition, the OpenSolaris
> community itself produces a distro that is compatible.
> 

Why is THE OpenSolaris distribution the most controversial, if it should
be THE distribution?

I'm not against Indiana, I think it is good idea and several interesting
things is comming from it. Except two things:

a) how it is cooperating with the community (and it is outside and
inside of Sun, both sides are in same position around this
cooperation...)

b) if it should be the basic of OpenSolaris distro (including name of
the project), it shouldn't make controversial decisions without the
community

These two things destroy the whole work of the Indiana group :-( They
should change on of these two and the situation will be much better.

Best regards,

Milan



From me at tomservo.cc  Fri Nov  2 05:19:35 2007
From: me at tomservo.cc (Mario Goebbels)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:19:35 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472B15D7.1070401@tomservo.cc>

>>    I would like kernel modules and userland binaries compiled on OSRI
>>    to run, unmodified, on any dist that calls itself based on OSRI.  I
>>    know this sounds a little silly (and maybe pretty obvious), but for
>>    any of you that have had to develop and support software on Linux,
>>    and in particular, the Linux kernel - you know how important this
>>    stuff is.
> 
> Compatiblitiy is less trivial than you might belive but without conformance 
> tests, we cannot claim anything about compatibility of siftware or 
> distributions.

Obviously, guaranteeing a compatibility baseline for the whole system
isn't practically possible.

What should be made sure is that there's a conformance test where you
can hand out sort of a e-badge, that tells an user that the kernel
hasn't been screwed with custom patches (unlike what every major Linux
distro does). This would be of interest for driver developers.

While I don't expect distro makers doing their own kernel tweaking on
their distros yet, you have to plan ahead so that this conformance thing
is in place for the case OpenSolaris actually takes off like the Sun
management (i.e. JSchwartz, Murdock and cohorts) hopes.

-mg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/1f8154ac/attachment.bin>

From me at tomservo.cc  Fri Nov  2 05:54:10 2007
From: me at tomservo.cc (Mario Goebbels)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:54:10 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <200711021233.lA2CXShE003630@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B15D7.1070401@tomservo.cc>
	<200711021233.lA2CXShE003630@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B1DF2.2090501@tomservo.cc>

> Quite; having a "Reference Distro" to develop on would help, though,
> as it allows customers to determine whether an ISV supplied
> package works on the reference distro as promised and whether the
> issue is unique to their distro or not.

I think Indiana will be the defacto reference distro on the midterm,
alone for the fact that it originates from opensolaris.org, that a lot
of Sun people are involved and that it's currently the most visible one.
So that's already covered for free. Until an Ubuntu-level derivate comes
along and grabs the biggest share of users.

>> What should be made sure is that there's a conformance test where you
>> can hand out sort of a e-badge, that tells an user that the kernel
>> hasn't been screwed with custom patches (unlike what every major Linux
>> distro does). This would be of interest for driver developers.
> 
> That's still a hard problem to solve and I think that that is
> not where I would expect divergence to occur first and foremost.

I suppose so, but I'm talking strictly kernel. There should be at least
an afterthought regarding this. Because once there's a flood of posts
like "OMG all drivers broke with the Moonaris 2.31 update! That's it,
I'm going back to Linux!" just because the Moonaris developers figured
they had to introduce some homebrewn performance tweaks while still
claiming to be 100% OpenSolaris, it's too probably late. Especially
considering the planning time needed to create a kernel conformance test
afterwards.

Doesn't the kernel team have huge test suites and unit tests that can be
used for this? If tweaks to the kernel break various third party drivers
(and possibly internal things), they'd probably also make some of the
tests fail.

> I would expect libraries to be missing, be in different locations, have
> different versions, different "SONAME"s and that sort of thing; different
> version of GNOME etc.

As said, I'm thinking kernel only currently. Shipping closed source
drivers in Linux is a big pain, since it involves jokes like binary
blobs and source code that has to be compiled on install time, followed
by driver breaking on kernel updates. Not to mention all custom patches
that differ with every distro.

An advantage of OpenSolaris is that there is a stable ABI, there isn't a
license involved that requires you to spill your secrets, as well a lack
of militant mindset that everything closed source is the pest.

-mg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/30be5131/attachment.bin>

From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 06:20:56 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 06:20:56 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] screwdrivers - Re: [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711011329td5bd346g13352c32b7e2a935@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<5b5090780711011329td5bd346g13352c32b7e2a935@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472B2438.6040900@Sun.Com>

[I'm close to 200 messages behind in this discussion at this point...]

Brandorr wrote:
>> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature.  Do you see it as a
>> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris?
>>
>> If it is a bug (as I believe), how do we fix it?
> 
> John this reads as if you believe the existence of Nexenta, Shillix,
> MartUX and Belenix are bugs? If so, I don't think it's the best way to
> get your point across to Joerg. ;)

At this point, all of "our" distros are relatively compatible with
each other, unlike the general Linux world.  If we can define (and
effectively sustain) a compatibility culture, we won't have this bug.

> John, in our trademark discussions you stated that OpenSolaris should
> not be used as a standalone noun. As in Joerg's screwdriver analogy.
> Am I missing something.

If we define a compatibility story, then, as Joerg says, it makes
sense to call the "thing that inplements and deploys exactly and only
those compatibility bits" OpenSolaris.

I don't believe for a minute that Indiana 10/07 is such a beast,
nor that Indiana 3/08 will limit itself to being only that subset.

   -John


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 06:24:58 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:24:58 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re:
	[osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472B2438.6040900@Sun.Com> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<5b5090780711011329td5bd346g13352c32b7e2a935@mail.gmail.com>
	<472B2438.6040900@Sun.Com> 
Message-ID: <200711021324.lA2DOwJS015198@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>


>At this point, all of "our" distros are relatively compatible with
>each other, unlike the general Linux world.  If we can define (and
>effectively sustain) a compatibility culture, we won't have this bug.

Isn't that with the exception of Nexenta which has hidden away much
of Solaris userland?

Casper


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 06:47:52 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:47:52 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] screwdrivers - Re:
	[advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b0f5f.k4ZHvFdSS7cYmrRn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011603mf1e75ap9fa2d3722529d387@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0f5f.k4ZHvFdSS7cYmrRn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711020647y7d128bc1ic47ee3d749333c72@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > We should have an official community distribution that is prominent
> > and the other ones can be easily gotten to as well.
> >
> > If people have to read six paragraphs of text before they can do
> > anything useful; they'll likely just say "this sucks! I'll stick with
> > Linux!" and go somewhere else.
>
> You are trying to use the same facts for arguing pro and contra the same
> issue.

I don't think so. The point is that if the download process is complex
and involves forcing users to make "an educated choice" before they
can download something useful; they'll go somewhere else. When we have
a reference distribution (because there is absolutely no doubt in my
mind that we will; otherwise we will die) it should and must be
featured more prominently than other ones so most users will be able
to click and go.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 06:49:43 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:49:43 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472af4dd.xLPl5faSpsLiu/PA%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710310944xce8c71ch560635dbcb1112c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B35A.3010900@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0710311007nddd8ea7g8736742279e7a5fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311022k92a8b3asca10fb7e27f7051b@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729b142.CqDvqGcM6XGDvYX2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011539r69c3fd7bj3020d10a50143fab@mail.gmail.com>
	<472af4dd.xLPl5faSpsLiu/PA%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711020649w263cda5di365ee2efa745aa91@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ubuntu thrived despite Debian's long years of existence.
> > > >
> > > > Slackware continues despite RedHat's rise.
> > > >
> > > > SUSE continues despite RedHat.
> > > >
> > > > Mandraiva continues despite ... etc.
> > >
> > > Does Suse claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > Does Ubuntu claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > Does Redhat claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > Does Mandriva claim to publish "Linux"?
> >
> > That isn't the same. Linux is a kernel; the material provided by
> > OpenSolaris comprises a complete operating system.
>
> Not true: OpenSolaris is not even a complete basic OS.
>
> Guess why I had to work hard to create the SchilliX distribution to make
> a bootable environment from the OpenSolaris bits? Also note that the tendency to
> replace useland tools by GNU tools let's OpenSolaris approach the Linux idea
> of only being a kernel.

The distribution constructor + Indiana will prove that statement
wrong. Jorg, this isn't two years ago, we're in a far better situation
now than we were when you made SchilliX. For example, we have libm,
etc. now.

Folks *can* build their own distribution right now only using
components available from OpenSolaris.org.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 06:50:39 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:50:39 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472af512.Y0b3Z5PzK/sjTbSy%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<4728b2d9.evG0FRMNz6xTs5xO%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728C22E.8070605@sun.com>
	<4729b1db.7tSiKivbgUdGzvt1%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011540h31e563d9hbc1a1b1c25679868@mail.gmail.com>
	<472af512.Y0b3Z5PzK/sjTbSy%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711020650l7b9daea8y2aab2ab86fdc6f46@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > On 01/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > > Sara Dornsife <Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > As other distros cannot use the brand name, it would be bad if Sun used it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > We have been discussing TM guidelines and usage scenarios for the past
> > > > two weeks. We are working to create NEW guidelines. Yes, the current
> > > > (past) guidelines have been restrictive. I'd like to see you work with
> > > > the rest of us on how to create new guidelines that work better for all
> > > > distributions.
> > >
> > > We had this discussion long ago and we decided that it was a bad idea to allow
> > > a distribution to use the name OpenSolaris. I do not see anything that would
> > > change the constraints here.
> >
> > Who's this mysterious we?
>
> THe OpenSolaris community. Maybe you have not been in that time.

No, I wasn't part of the pilot project and since that was under NDA, I
don't think there's much point in referencing any decisions from that
time.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 06:52:46 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:52:46 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711020652y140cc8d9gde4e3fd1df938f53@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > Joerg, the only reason SchilliX hasn't gone anywhere is because you
> > and others haven't taken the steps necessary to make that happen.
>
> This is definitely not true.

Yes it is. It is the same reason that star isn't integrated yet. No
one has done the work necessary to make that happen; or at the least
finish it. You can't just say "star is great tool, now please
integrate it for me." It doesn't work that way. Roland showed us all
exactly how and what needs to be done to get something integrated.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 06:53:40 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:53:40 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b0b57.Qm3oyi9w4WCespuY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011328p1dd17f7bq2d99c1817f00482d@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0b57.Qm3oyi9w4WCespuY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711020653i58883bf7pfc3fd04ed72458a3@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > > People did accuse that I did not try to create a community and for this
> > > reason, I need to explain that Sun was not interested in such a community.
> >
> > Why should Sun have to be interested? You could have proposed
> > something to the community. Why must Sun be the one to make everything
> > happen?
>
> I did try to get help from the community and I did have many discussions
> with Sun to no avail. What is your concern?

So people weren't interested. That happens sometimes. But you can't
blame others for this failure.

> The problem is that Sun takes working project ideas from the community outside
> Sun and creates internal projects with nearly identical goals. This is something
> that causes the main problems in the opensolaris related mailing lists.

I'm not sure I agree, but I've only been working with Solaris since
2005; obviously you have twenty more years on me.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From sommerfeld at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 07:49:46 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:49:46 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Comments on Trademark usage and Branding
	guideline
Message-ID: <1194014986.2588.13.camel@localhost>

0) there should be higher level guidance/goals/rationale on the trademark policy.

The primary purpose of trademarks is to prevent confusion in the marketplace.  

The opensolaris trademark policy exists to encourage proper use of the
mark and discourage improper use.

Proper use excludes uses (even ones otherwise complying with this
policy) which can be reasonably misread to imply things which aren't
true or which otherwise damage the reputation of opensolaris.  

This policy is not frozen for all time but may expand to include
additional approved use patterns if the community and sun feel the
existing set is insufficient.

1) I find the word "distro" annoying.  perhaps we could strip it out except as
a specific example, and generalize to:

	"<name>, an opensolaris <noun>"  

(with a prequalified list of <noun>s which, sigh, includes "distro", and
with a provision unused <noun> can be added with a hopefully lightweight
<noun>-specific qualification process; <noun> should not imply unique or
special current or future status for the <name>).

2) the specific example of:

"Indiana 10/07, an OpenSolaris Preview"

is problematic because it can be read to imply it is the precursor to
the unqualified "Opensolaris" that (according to the prior section) we
don't know how to deal with yet.

3) "built with opensolaris technology": 

with regard to the question:
	(what about using ZFS, but by way of BSD and not Indiana - ref Mark
Martin)

IMHO it would be good for us if (as a specific example) Apple were to
describe MacOS as "* built with OpenSolaris Technology" or "built, in
part, with ..." or "built, in part, with OpenSolaris's dtrace and zfs"





From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 08:01:50 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:01:50 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711020652y140cc8d9gde4e3fd1df938f53@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020652y140cc8d9gde4e3fd1df938f53@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472b3bde.8YzSz3/Xtn2xDmhG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Joerg, the only reason SchilliX hasn't gone anywhere is because you
> > > and others haven't taken the steps necessary to make that happen.
> >
> > This is definitely not true.
>
> Yes it is. It is the same reason that star isn't integrated yet. No
> one has done the work necessary to make that happen; or at the least
> finish it. You can't just say "star is great tool, now please

You constantly jump between different acusations. Please stop this.

Please do not blame me that (except Mike Kupfer and Jim Walker) nobody
from Sun did contribute. If nobody from likes to help here, then Sun is not
yet ready for OpenSolaris.


I am open to people who like to help, but please do not constantly try to blame 
me that you and other do nothing.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 08:40:31 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:40:31 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b3bde.8YzSz3/Xtn2xDmhG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> 
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020652y140cc8d9gde4e3fd1df938f53@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b3bde.8YzSz3/Xtn2xDmhG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <200711021540.lA2FeVir002280@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>


>Please do not blame me that (except Mike Kupfer and Jim Walker) nobody
>from Sun did contribute. If nobody from likes to help here, then Sun is not
>yet ready for OpenSolaris.

I'm sorry?  Are we *obliged* in some way to help people with projects?

The only help people are somewhat entitled to, IMHO, is help after
filing a request-sponsor request.

Don't forget that Sun is not paying people to work on projects other
than Sun's own project; and any help given by sun folks to bits outside
their job description is voluntary and NOT from Sun but from the
individual employee.

So it is IMPOSSIBLE to blame anyone for not helping.  Not Sun, not
individual employees.  Projects get traction because people find
them sexy and they offer to the best of their abilities; in some
cases, such as a whole distro, any task may seem to daunting.
And the laptop community primarily attracts folks who want wireless
drivers; but for them it is far too difficult to write them.

Casper


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 08:56:51 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 10:56:51 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b3bde.8YzSz3/Xtn2xDmhG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020652y140cc8d9gde4e3fd1df938f53@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b3bde.8YzSz3/Xtn2xDmhG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711020856v4d1cfd51pbd5da41e8244c7b1@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Joerg, the only reason SchilliX hasn't gone anywhere is because you
> > > > and others haven't taken the steps necessary to make that happen.
> > >
> > > This is definitely not true.
> >
> > Yes it is. It is the same reason that star isn't integrated yet. No
> > one has done the work necessary to make that happen; or at the least
> > finish it. You can't just say "star is great tool, now please
>
> You constantly jump between different acusations. Please stop this.

It isn't an accusation. ksh93 got integrated; start hasn't. Therefore
I can only conclude one of two things:

1) that the necessary work to integrate start has not yet been done or finished

2) that a vast conspiracy exists at Sun to prevent start from being integrated

Since #2 isn't within the realm of reality; I'm going to go with option #1.

> Please do not blame me that (except Mike Kupfer and Jim Walker) nobody
> from Sun did contribute. If nobody from likes to help here, then Sun is not
> yet ready for OpenSolaris.

Jorg, blaming individuals for the lack of integration of star isn't
going to help anyone. Roland got ksh93 integrated so I have complete
faith you can get start integrated if you are willing to do the work
and *compromise* (e.g. deal with the whole compatibility with SUN tar
despite its problems).

> I am open to people who like to help, but please do not constantly try to blame
> me that you and other do nothing.

Actually, I'd be more than willing to help you get star integrated; I
like it that much. However, I have not yet volunteered for that as I
don't have the time at the moment. I have my own RTIs I'm trying to
get done. However, once I have the time, I would be more than happy to
help you get through arc and do the necessary work required to get
star integrated.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 09:07:16 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:07:16 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711020856v4d1cfd51pbd5da41e8244c7b1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020652y140cc8d9gde4e3fd1df938f53@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b3bde.8YzSz3/Xtn2xDmhG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020856v4d1cfd51pbd5da41e8244c7b1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472b4b34.TDhpMS2cDepiT4fV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> Jorg, blaming individuals for the lack of integration of star isn't
> going to help anyone. Roland got ksh93 integrated so I have complete
> faith you can get start integrated if you are willing to do the work
> and *compromise* (e.g. deal with the whole compatibility with SUN tar
> despite its problems).

You forget that _you_ are blaming me and this is absolutely not helpful as
I am not responsible for the lack of interest to get a better tar in Solaris.

It would help a lot oif you did stop repeating these unhelful claims.


> Actually, I'd be more than willing to help you get star integrated; I
> like it that much. However, I have not yet volunteered for that as I


I did not see you in any code related discussion here..... please explain.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 09:12:15 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:12:15 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [OT] star integration was Re:
	[indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss] Project
	Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711020912s2f444cc8xb09976daa83615e9@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > Jorg, blaming individuals for the lack of integration of star isn't
> > going to help anyone. Roland got ksh93 integrated so I have complete
> > faith you can get start integrated if you are willing to do the work
> > and *compromise* (e.g. deal with the whole compatibility with SUN tar
> > despite its problems).
>
> You forget that _you_ are blaming me and this is absolutely not helpful as
> I am not responsible for the lack of interest to get a better tar in Solaris.

That's the problem Jorg. If you want something to be done you have to
do it yourself. Please tell me why Roland was able to get ksh93
integrated and went through arc and everything, but you haven't
finished that process yet.

> > Actually, I'd be more than willing to help you get star integrated; I
> > like it that much. However, I have not yet volunteered for that as I
>
>
> I did not see you in any code related discussion here..... please explain.

This is somewhat offtopic.

Look at this page:
http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports/request_sponsor/

As you can see, I have a few pending sponsor requests as well as one
I'm working with Tom Haynes on right now.

I also have a few that I had suspended for due to time constraints
that I intend to pick back up.

You'll also see I have a few RTIs that were successful.

You can also look at the pkg-discuss lists or request-sponsor lists or
opensolaris-code lists to see posts I've made reviewing code for
others or asking questions about my own.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 09:17:04 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:17:04 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [OT] star integration was Re:
 [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the
 OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711020912s2f444cc8xb09976daa83615e9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b9c544f0711020912s2f444cc8xb09976daa83615e9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472b4d80.T9c2zfGk40kTkfs2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> > "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Jorg, blaming individuals for the lack of integration of star isn't
> > > going to help anyone. Roland got ksh93 integrated so I have complete
> > > faith you can get start integrated if you are willing to do the work
> > > and *compromise* (e.g. deal with the whole compatibility with SUN tar
> > > despite its problems).
> >
> > You forget that _you_ are blaming me and this is absolutely not helpful as
> > I am not responsible for the lack of interest to get a better tar in Solaris.
>
> That's the problem Jorg. If you want something to be done you have to
> do it yourself. Please tell me why Roland was able to get ksh93
> integrated and went through arc and everything, but you haven't
> finished that process yet.

You are misunderstanding the problem completeley: I _am_ doing things myself
for a long time. 

Roland did have more luck than I have.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Fri Nov  2 09:57:28 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:57:28 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711020649w263cda5di365ee2efa745aa91@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710310944xce8c71ch560635dbcb1112c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B35A.3010900@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0710311007nddd8ea7g8736742279e7a5fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311022k92a8b3asca10fb7e27f7051b@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729b142.CqDvqGcM6XGDvYX2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011539r69c3fd7bj3020d10a50143fab@mail.gmail.com>
	<472af4dd.xLPl5faSpsLiu/PA%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020649w263cda5di365ee2efa745aa91@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472b56f8.VhgxUBZW2wCnIUD8%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

"Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:

> > > > Does Suse claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > > Does Ubuntu claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > > Does Redhat claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > > Does Mandriva claim to publish "Linux"?
> > >
> > > That isn't the same. Linux is a kernel; the material provided by
> > > OpenSolaris comprises a complete operating system.
> >
> > Not true: OpenSolaris is not even a complete basic OS.
> >
> > Guess why I had to work hard to create the SchilliX distribution to make
> > a bootable environment from the OpenSolaris bits? Also note that the tendency to
> > replace useland tools by GNU tools let's OpenSolaris approach the Linux idea
> > of only being a kernel.
>
> The distribution constructor + Indiana will prove that statement
> wrong. Jorg, this isn't two years ago, we're in a far better situation
> now than we were when you made SchilliX. For example, we have libm,
> etc. now.
>
> Folks *can* build their own distribution right now only using
> components available from OpenSolaris.org.

Why do you try to be non-cooperative?

You create a lot of traffic in this thread but you do not help the topic 
to be resolved. The problem is that Sun needs to learn to cooperate with the
community if OpenSolaris should become a success.

It does not help at all if Sun let's people from the non-sun community develop
ideas and then start to implement them inside Sun. This will discourage the 
community and this is why e.g. John Sonnenschein seems to be angry.

Sun needs to learn that people will stop publishing ideas if they are stolen by 
Sun.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 10:03:38 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 12:03:38 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b56f8.VhgxUBZW2wCnIUD8%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310944xce8c71ch560635dbcb1112c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728B35A.3010900@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0710311007nddd8ea7g8736742279e7a5fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710311022k92a8b3asca10fb7e27f7051b@mail.gmail.com>
	<4729b142.CqDvqGcM6XGDvYX2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011539r69c3fd7bj3020d10a50143fab@mail.gmail.com>
	<472af4dd.xLPl5faSpsLiu/PA%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020649w263cda5di365ee2efa745aa91@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b56f8.VhgxUBZW2wCnIUD8%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021003h3c89dc50i4118e0bccff8b5b4@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>
> > > > > Does Suse claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > > > Does Ubuntu claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > > > Does Redhat claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > > > Does Mandriva claim to publish "Linux"?
> > > >
> > > > That isn't the same. Linux is a kernel; the material provided by
> > > > OpenSolaris comprises a complete operating system.
> > >
> > > Not true: OpenSolaris is not even a complete basic OS.
> > >
> > > Guess why I had to work hard to create the SchilliX distribution to make
> > > a bootable environment from the OpenSolaris bits? Also note that the tendency to
> > > replace useland tools by GNU tools let's OpenSolaris approach the Linux idea
> > > of only being a kernel.
> >
> > The distribution constructor + Indiana will prove that statement
> > wrong. Jorg, this isn't two years ago, we're in a far better situation
> > now than we were when you made SchilliX. For example, we have libm,
> > etc. now.
> >
> > Folks *can* build their own distribution right now only using
> > components available from OpenSolaris.org.
>
> Why do you try to be non-cooperative?

It isn't being non-cooperative. I'm trying to explain what I feel is
the actual situation.

> You create a lot of traffic in this thread but you do not help the topic
> to be resolved. The problem is that Sun needs to learn to cooperate with the
> community if OpenSolaris should become a success.

On the contrary, I feel that many (including myself) are coming to
better understand your particular viewpoint. Therefore I do believe it
is helping resolution.

You will not hear any disagreement from me that Sun needs to cooperate
with the community. However, your definition of cooperate seems to
include doing work on your behalf sometimes when it isn't necessary.

> It does not help at all if Sun let's people from the non-sun community develop
> ideas and then start to implement them inside Sun. This will discourage the
> community and this is why e.g. John Sonnenschein seems to be angry.

In your particular case, I do not believe that any idea has been
stolen. In general though, is not most software simply a better
iteration of someone else's ideals?

> Sun needs to learn that people will stop publishing ideas if they are stolen by
> Sun.

Let's not go accusing people or "entities" of things that aren't
necessarily true.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From Ian.Murdock at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 10:16:18 2007
From: Ian.Murdock at Sun.COM (Ian Murdock)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:16:18 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] I'm sorry, but I just don't get it
Message-ID: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>

All right.

I don't even know where to begin.

Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"

Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?

Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?

Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?

And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?

Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
so therefore we've given nothing?

I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.

-ian
-- 
Ian Murdock
http://ianmurdock.com/

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


From dclarke at blastwave.org  Fri Nov  2 10:24:33 2007
From: dclarke at blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 13:24:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1320.72.39.216.186.1194024273.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>


> All right.
>
> I don't even know where to begin.

Welcome to the OpenSolaris Community where you can do great work, endless
hours year after year and get endless heartache for it.

Ian, to be frank, you're new here.  This sort of thing has gone on for
years and while this community is intensely intelligent it is also a
very dysfunctional family.  Don't expect revelation overnight and don't
expect a magic bullet approach. You can lead people into the light but
you need to be a leader. Someone that people will follow straight out
of the gates of hell.

I think we are halfway there.

Dennis Clarke



From james.d.carlson at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 10:31:10 2007
From: james.d.carlson at Sun.COM (James Carlson)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 13:31:10 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <18219.24286.231353.643880@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

Ian Murdock writes:
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
[...]

No.  None of those things are actually under discussion here.  What's
under discussion is the taking of the name "OpenSolaris" and the
branding of this particular distribution as the one and only
OpenSolaris developer distribution *without* any corresponding
community endorsement of that decision.

Yes, of course we're well aware of what the project is doing.  It's
great that it's getting good reviews.  The amount of work done in a
very short period of time is just fantastic.  I think the project team
needs to be commended for taking a huge leap forward.

But the lack of communication in this case has been disastrous, and
the messaging used simply atrocious.  That's the part that needs to be
fixed, and fixed quickly.

I have no doubt that a release like this will eventually be "the
OpenSolaris distribution."  I think that'll be a good result.
However, I continue to believe that this requires *explicit* community
endorsement, and is not something that can be dictated by Sun's
management.

> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?

It just misses the point.

-- 
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


From Tim.Foster at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 10:46:44 2007
From: Tim.Foster at Sun.COM (Tim Foster)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:46:44 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1194025604.3845.60.camel@cranialtrauma>

+1 This says it all for me. I'm also getting pretty sick of the rather
negative atmosphere around the mailing lists at the moment.

We just shipped a major milestone, and people are doing nothing but
bitching about it.  I'm glad the responsible project team are a pretty
thick skinned bunch, because I'd be feeling rather unappreciated if I
were them, based on many of these mails... (perhaps they're all still
recovering from the party)

Can we please start feeling proud of our achievements ? Please ? Beers
all round!
	
	cheers,
		tim


On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:16 -0400, Ian Murdock wrote:
> All right.
> 
> I don't even know where to begin.
> 
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
> 
> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
> 
> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
> 
> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
> 
> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
> 
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?
> 
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
> 
> -ian
-- 
Tim Foster, Sun Microsystems Inc, Solaris Engineering Ops
http://blogs.sun.com/timf



From sommerfeld at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 10:42:46 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:42:46 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:16 -0400, Ian Murdock wrote:
> I don't even know where to begin.

You should start with the choice of name.  

Names are very important.

Pick a new one that properly communicates this release's status as an
experimental prototype produced by a subset of the community without
prior broad review, and all will be well.

To me, at least, "Preview" has a strong connotation of "almost done".

The current name is already causing confusion -- on one sun-internal
list someone  seemed to think it was baked enough that it could go -- in
its current form -- on ruggedized mil-spec laptops for mission-critical
applications.

I booted it.  I crashed the installer a few times, and then got it to
work.

It's a very promising start but parts of it are held together with duct
tape and bailing wire and it's not ready for prime time.  

> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.

It's all about the name.  Back away from "OpenSolaris Developer Preview"
and this nightmare will end.

					- Bill






From bmc at eng.sun.com  Fri Nov  2 10:42:49 2007
From: bmc at eng.sun.com (Bryan Cantrill)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 10:42:49 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>


Ian,

> All right.
> 
> I don't even know where to begin.
> 
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
> 
> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
> 
> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
> 
> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
> 
> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
> 
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?
> 
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.

I assume that you actually _do_ get it -- that your plea of ignorance is
rhetorical ploy and not an actual confession of limited mental capacity --
but for the sake of argument, allow me to clarify:  the issue is
nomenclature.  That's it; it's not more complicated than that.  As members
of our community's elected body have made exhaustively clear, there is
a consensus that a single OpenSolaris-derived distribution -- even one
emanating from Sun -- should not have exclusive use of the name
"OpenSolaris".  That is, a distribution should be allowed to be derived
from OpenSolaris, but no one distribution should be allowed to simply
_be_ OpenSolaris.  

So I guess it's my turn to say that I don't get it:  given that this is
such a small issue -- and one in which our elected body is so clearly
speaking with one voice -- why do you insist on persisting down what is
clearly such a divisive path?

	- Bryan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan Cantrill, Sun Microsystems FishWorks.       http://blogs.sun.com/bmc


From Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 10:55:59 2007
From: Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM (Sara Dornsife)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:55:59 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [ogb-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>

Bill,

> It's all about the name.  Back away from "OpenSolaris Developer Preview"
> and this nightmare will end.
>   

And then what? I hope that doesn't sound facetious, I'm really asking 
what you see as next steps.
Sara


> 					- Bill
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> indiana-discuss mailing list
> indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
>   


From Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 11:06:11 2007
From: Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM (Sara Dornsife)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:06:11 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B6713.3060703@sun.com>

Bryan Cantrill wrote:
> Ian,
>
>   
>> All right.
>>
>> I don't even know where to begin.
>>
>> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
>> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
>> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
>>
>> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
>> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
>> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
>>
>> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
>> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
>> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
>> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
>> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
>> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
>>
>> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
>> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
>> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
>> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
>> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
>> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
>> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
>>
>> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
>> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
>> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
>> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
>> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
>> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
>> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
>>
>> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
>> so therefore we've given nothing?
>>
>> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>>     
>
> I assume that you actually _do_ get it -- that your plea of ignorance is
> rhetorical ploy and not an actual confession of limited mental capacity --
> but for the sake of argument, allow me to clarify:  the issue is
> nomenclature.  That's it; it's not more complicated than that.  As members
> of our community's elected body have made exhaustively clear, there is
> a consensus that a single OpenSolaris-derived distribution -- even one
> emanating from Sun -- should not have exclusive use of the name
> "OpenSolaris".  That is, a distribution should be allowed to be derived
> from OpenSolaris, but no one distribution should be allowed to simply
> _be_ OpenSolaris.  
>   

There has absolutely not been consensus reached.

> So I guess it's my turn to say that I don't get it:  given that this is
> such a small issue -- and one in which our elected body is so clearly
> speaking with one voice -- why do you insist on persisting down what is
> clearly such a divisive path?
>   

This is obviously NOT a small issue.

> 	- Bryan
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bryan Cantrill, Sun Microsystems FishWorks.       http://blogs.sun.com/bmc
> _______________________________________________
> trademark-policy-dev mailing list
> trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/25c0259d/attachment.html>

From me at tomservo.cc  Fri Nov  2 10:26:28 2007
From: me at tomservo.cc (Mario Goebbels)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:26:28 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B5DC4.5000307@tomservo.cc>

> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.

The issue at hand is mainly that there was a discussion initiated,
including the trademark-dev list, just to have you jump into it and
simply decide out of the blue that it's "OpenSolaris" and basta (well,
"you" because you're the frontman for all people involved). A decision
which seemed to be the opposite of what was currently being discussed on
that list.

> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"

I don't think that the name "OpenSolaris" is making the big difference
here. It could be called whatever else, as long it's featured and
endorsed on opensolaris.org as Indiana is right now, it would have
resulted in the same feedback. Whatever site I go, that's reporting
about it, is still referring to it as Project Indiana.

-mg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/d3b94887/attachment.bin>

From jbeck at eng.sun.com  Fri Nov  2 10:27:58 2007
From: jbeck at eng.sun.com (John Beck)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:27:58 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:16:18 EDT."
	<472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> 
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> 
Message-ID: <200711021727.lA2HRwNr144583@opal.eng.sun.com>

Ian> Does it matter at all that ...

Yes, all that stuff matters.


Ian> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this community,
Ian> PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of being able
Ian> to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed repeatedly by
Ian> many of those same people for our trouble, and in return thinks it
Ian> reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?

Yes, that matters too, but I think the disconnect is "_some_ say" vs making
a unilateral decision with no consultation or even pre-announcement.  That
is not what most people here seem to think makes a community.


Ian> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
Ian> so therefore we've given nothing?

No, you seem to be making this more black-and-white than I see it.  Welcome
to the world of Solaris, where everyone is a critic because everyone strives
for perfection.  The developer preview is fantastic; I don't think anyone is
quibbling with that.  Rather, they're upset about the name, which implies
that Sun has unilaterally decided that OpenSolaris belongs to itself rather
than the community.


Ian> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.

I hope the above helps.  Welcome to our strange culture.

-- John

http://blogs.sun.com/jbeck


From johnsonnenschein at gmail.com  Fri Nov  2 10:29:34 2007
From: johnsonnenschein at gmail.com (John Sonnenschein)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 10:29:34 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <A12D10C9-2F22-4C20-B9DB-38C33BC89526@gmail.com>


On 2-Nov-07, at 10:16 AM, Ian Murdock wrote:

> All right.
>
> I don't even know where to begin.
>
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"

No.

> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?

No.

> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the  
> IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those  
> outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?

If you ( Sun ) don't listen to the community and just show us what  
you're doing rather than working with us, then No. Microsoft and Apple  
can (and do) do that but nobody claims Win. and OSX are "open source"

> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand,

You have done no such thing. You dictated the "proper" usage of the  
brand.

> <blah blah aren't we great...>

>
>  and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community  
> functions?
>
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without  
> representation?
>
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?


Sun absolutely ought to get some say in how the community functions  
and how the brand is used. However they should not get the /only/ say.



From maybird1776 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 10:36:41 2007
From: maybird1776 at yahoo.com (ken mays)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 10:36:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <531522.16734.qm@web34211.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Ian,

To those people in the 'OpenSolaris Community' that do
know a thing or two - we get it. Yet, in all societies
you know that there is debate over past issues that
need to be addressed whether negative or positive in
impact.

So I'd just say, let those that have an issue or
complaint be heard at least. I only say I think some
people are not intentionally trying to be demeaning or
degrading (I **really** hope not), just that they feel
their past commens or inquiries fell on deaf ears
beforehand so now they wish to vent this issue to
those "willing" to listen and even care about those
issues.

This is the way it is in any community or society all
over the world. Freedom of speech or expression from
OpenSolaris community memebers -- but hopefully done
with some respect and humility. Not dictatorship, but
equality amongest peers and community. Is this not
what the OpenSolaris developer Summit revealed as we
sat amongest our peers and listened to frustrations
and issues at hand?!?

We do need to become more focused and document these
issues so they can be addressed and hopefully not
ignored. These issues may "pinch a few ears and step
on toes" but I'd hope both the OGB and
community/project leaders will at least take heed and
try to appreciate the input.

Do this and we may stay and stand united. Don't do
this and things may end up like falling dominoes - one
community member and user group at a time...

~ Ken Mays

















All right.

I don't even know where to begin.

Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this
community to
the idea that we're producing a binary distribution
called
OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What
took so long?"

Does it matter that the initial feedback on the
Developer Preview
has been overwhelming positive, that so many more
people in the
world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach
is WORKING?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From Jonathan.Edwards at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 10:37:21 2007
From: Jonathan.Edwards at Sun.COM (Jonathan Edwards)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:37:21 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <723FC586-F043-4ACA-AF56-ECBC904A3566@sun.com>


On Nov 2, 2007, at 10:16, Ian Murdock wrote:

> All right.
>
> I don't even know where to begin.

hear hear!  thanks for your candid insight Ian! .. i've only been at  
sun for about 10 years now, but from what i've seen it's always been  
a chaotic mess of consolidations replete with long pointless debates  
and packaging nightmares

i'm sure i'm not the only one who *really* welcomes your efforts to  
move matterhorns of crusty historic cruft that seem to have existed  
for eons with solaris .. from my 100000 mile view - it seems to me  
that the opensolaris/linux comparison really breaks down since linux  
is really focused on the kernel, and opensolaris is really based on a  
meta consolidation - you're always going to have a few vocal  
advocates for how things should really be branded (eg: RMS and GNU/ 
Linux) .. but damn the politics and keep pressing on!

---
.je


From bill at rushmores.net  Fri Nov  2 10:50:15 2007
From: bill at rushmores.net (Bill Rushmore)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:50:15 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B6357.8040907@rushmores.net>

Ian Murdock wrote:
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>
> -ian
>   

I am with Ian here, I just don't get it either.  While I really can't 
say I really agree 100 % with what was done I just don't get the 
responses and how this whole thing has blown up into yet another flame 
fest that bombs are inboxes. I have been involved with "OpenSolaris" for 
a couple of years now and I now I am really starting to question why.   
If the last big war about GPL wasn't bad enough.

What we really need in this community is real leadership if we are going 
to survive.  At least Ian's sticking his neck out doing something that 
has potential rather than just arguing about it ad nauseam so I'll stand 
by him and the decsions.   Personally I'd rather follow someone that 
does something and might make a mistake or two rather than someone who 
can make a decision on anything.

Bill
rushmores.net



From garrett at damore.org  Fri Nov  2 10:50:19 2007
From: garrett at damore.org (Garrett D'Amore)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:50:19 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B635B.2030005@damore.org>

Very simply Ian, I think a lot of people agree that the *end* result (a 
binary downloadable called OpenSolaris) is probably a good thing.

What the community is objecting to is *how* we got there.  Sun (or your 
team) unilaterally decided to apply the brand, without really consulting 
the community.  A lot of people are feeling disenfranchised as a result.

    -- Garrett

Ian Murdock wrote:
> All right.
>
> I don't even know where to begin.
>
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
>
> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
>
> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
>
> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
>
> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
>
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?
>
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>
> -ian
>   



From max at bruningsystems.com  Fri Nov  2 10:56:41 2007
From: max at bruningsystems.com (max at bruningsystems.com)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:56:41 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B64D9.9010108@bruningsystems.com>

Hi Ian,
I have been (quietly) so far following this long discussion and may as 
well put in
my 2 cents (several other people have contributed a lot more).
I would rather download and install something called "Sun OpenSolaris" 
than "OpenSolaris".
I trust Sun to have gone through all the testing needed to ensure a 
working system, and I expect
Sun's version to be the best of the current technology.  I also 
understand that if there is
a distribution called simply OpenSolaris, many people will not bother 
looking at other
distributions.  If I was trying to get into the RedHat (or pick your 
favorite Linux distribution), I
would be very upset with the name "OpenSolaris".  It's only a naming 
issue (and, I guess, the way
the name was chosen), that people are upset about.  So, why not qualify 
the name by showing its roots
(i.e, Sun)?  I'm sorry, maybe I just don't get it...  Maybe this 
argument is about something else
entirely?

max

Ian Murdock wrote:
> All right.
>
> I don't even know where to begin.
>
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
>
> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
>
> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
>
> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
>
> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
>
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?
>
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>
> -ian
>   



From garrett at damore.org  Fri Nov  2 11:02:44 2007
From: garrett at damore.org (Garrett D'Amore)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:02:44 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
 sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
	<472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B6644.60201@damore.org>

Sara Dornsife wrote:
> Bill,
>
>   
>> It's all about the name.  Back away from "OpenSolaris Developer Preview"
>> and this nightmare will end.
>>   
>>     
>
> And then what? I hope that doesn't sound facetious, I'm really asking 
> what you see as next steps.
>   

Ask for community buy-in on the name usage.   The problem again isn't 
the end result (although I'm sure there are folks who disagree with 
that), but the fact that community involvement was elided in selecting 
this name, usurping the front opensolaris.org web page, etc.

Right now, it feels like Project Indiana has completely usurped the 
OpenSolaris brand without any consultation from the community.

The community was founded as a *community*, not a benevolent 
dictatorship.  Once you come to grips with that (and this is different 
for Ian, at Debian he could pretty much do whatever he wanted, IIUC), 
then I think the rest will start to make sense.

    -- Garrett

> Sara
>
>
>   
>> 					- Bill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> indiana-discuss mailing list
>> indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
>>   
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> ogb-discuss mailing list
> ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss
>   



From sommerfeld at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 11:10:07 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:10:07 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't	get it
In-Reply-To: <472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
	<472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1194027007.13457.20.camel@thunk>

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 12:55 -0500, Sara Dornsife wrote:
> > It's all about the name.  Back away from "OpenSolaris Developer Preview"
> > and this nightmare will end.
> 
> And then what? I hope that doesn't sound facetious, I'm really asking 
> what you see as next steps.

I think those steps include:

1) Finish the trademark policy (as a side note I've had past experience
with naming controversies and am more familiar with trademark law than I
want to be.  I sent in what I hope are constructive comments on the
draft this morning; haven't seen any responses yet).

2) Do the usual and customary open reviews of the Indiana proposal 
(including arc review, design reviews, code reviews, cteam, etc.), and
make changes based on review feedback.  (This should happen in parallel
with (1))

3) pick a name that complies with the trademark policy.

and finally:

Follow the process in the opensolaris constitution to vote on the
release; if that process doesn't work, propose amendments to the
constitution to fix the process.

					- Bill






From james.d.carlson at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 11:08:02 2007
From: james.d.carlson at Sun.COM (James Carlson)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 14:08:02 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
	<472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <18219.26498.970539.969307@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

Sara Dornsife writes:
> Bill,
> 
> > It's all about the name.  Back away from "OpenSolaris Developer Preview"
> > and this nightmare will end.
> >   
> 
> And then what? I hope that doesn't sound facetious, I'm really asking 
> what you see as next steps.

When you feel you're ready to do so, ask for a community-wide vote on
the endorsement of this particular distribution as the only one to be
called simply "OpenSolaris."

-- 
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


From chris.mahan at gmail.com  Fri Nov  2 11:18:03 2007
From: chris.mahan at gmail.com (Chris Mahan)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:18:03 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [ogb-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
	<472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4d9b53db0711021118o2145fd8fg17efa7afd33bfa37@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/2/07, Sara Dornsife <Sara.Dornsife at sun.com> wrote:
>
>
> And then what? I hope that doesn't sound facetious, I'm really asking
> what you see as next steps.
> Sara


Compromise?

Rename "OpenSolaris  Developer Preview" to "an OpenSolaris Developer
Preview"
(Notice the "an" part? Good)

Have Ian make an apology to the community for not letting the community know
what the name of the distro would be prior to the distro being released, and
for not allowing discussion and buy-in.

Of course, using the word "an" would imply that there are others. If in fact
it is Ian's position that there either are no other or that other distros
should not exist, then I suggest this "community" is in rough waters.

I think then that the OGB needs to work with Sun to get the trademark
acceptable policy usage ironed-out an published. At which point it will be
clear how the other distros can call themselves. This is especially
important because I think many more distros will appear in the near future.

So I have a couple of questions:

A) Does that solution appeal to anyone?

B) Would it work to ease the tension?

C) Would it help in the long term?


A final thought: I personally look forward to installing Indiana, and I
think it's a wonderful effort and kudos by the bucketful need to be swung in
all directions.  (It hangs on windows virtual pc 2004 btw, will try harder
and file bug report). I also look forward to messing with the new packaging
system. I think that's going to make a world of difference.


-- 
Chris Mahan
http://www.christophermahan.com/
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
chris.mahan at gmail.com
cell 818.943.1850
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/555d8e30/attachment.html>

From Tim.Foster at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 11:26:00 2007
From: Tim.Foster at Sun.COM (Tim Foster)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:26:00 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
 but I just	don't get it
In-Reply-To: <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
Message-ID: <1194027960.3845.68.camel@cranialtrauma>

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 10:42 -0700, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
> nomenclature.  That's it; it's not more complicated than that.  As members
> of our community's elected body have made exhaustively clear, there is
> a consensus that a single OpenSolaris-derived distribution -- even one
> emanating from Sun -- should not have exclusive use of the name
> "OpenSolaris".

We all thought it was okay to burn fossil fuels a few years ago; there
was a community consensus even that it was okay - this appears to be a
similar issue (though of less global importance I admit).

When do we start experimenting with the way we package our OS to see
whether that experiment enriches the community ? If we get more users as
a result of having a distro called "OpenSolaris", then that's great - if
we get fewer, then we'll have tried and failed, but at least we'll have
tried.

	cheers,
			tim

-- 
Tim Foster, Sun Microsystems Inc, Solaris Engineering Ops
http://blogs.sun.com/timf



From Bob.Netherton at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 11:19:50 2007
From: Bob.Netherton at Sun.COM (Bob Netherton)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:19:50 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [ogb-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't	get it
In-Reply-To: <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <1194027590.3986.41.camel@arrakis.netherton.homelinux.com>

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:42 -0400, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:

> Names are very important.

Absolutely.

> Pick a new one that properly communicates this release's status as an
> experimental prototype produced by a subset of the community without
> prior broad review, and all will be well.
> 
> To me, at least, "Preview" has a strong connotation of "almost done".

Hmmmm, I look at it as work in progress.  The web page clearly
indicates that another preview is coming, so almost done may be a
bit strong.  How about a consolidation of ideas that the project team
is thinking about, in a state suitable for public viewing ?

> The current name is already causing confusion -- on one sun-internal
> list someone  seemed to think it was baked enough that it could go -- in
> its current form -- on ruggedized mil-spec laptops for mission-critical
> applications.

well that's an issue :)  but has nothing to do with the preview release.

> It's a very promising start but parts of it are held together with duct
> tape and bailing wire and it's not ready for prime time.  

And as a preview, I wouldn't expect much more.  I've seen Fedora
previews that were way less polished, and that's after the community
had already gone through several releases.   I will say that I got more
than I expected on first boot, and that was cool.


> > I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
> 
> It's all about the name.  Back away from "OpenSolaris Developer Preview"
> and this nightmare will end.

Most respectfully disagree.  While I respect and admire a lot of the
passion shown in some of these threads, the community has to have a
distribution with easy association.  and then we have to work hard to
get OpenSolaris from noun to adjective.


bob



From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 11:23:45 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:23:45 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194025604.3845.60.camel@cranialtrauma> 
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
	<1194025604.3845.60.camel@cranialtrauma> 
Message-ID: <200711021823.lA2INjON007426@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>


>+1 This says it all for me. I'm also getting pretty sick of the rather
>negative atmosphere around the mailing lists at the moment.
>
>We just shipped a major milestone, and people are doing nothing but
>bitching about it.  I'm glad the responsible project team are a pretty
>thick skinned bunch, because I'd be feeling rather unappreciated if I
>were them, based on many of these mails... (perhaps they're all still
>recovering from the party)
>
>Can we please start feeling proud of our achievements ? Please ? Beers
>all round!

Sticking your head in the and and ignoring the criticism about the *name* 
and not the achievement is nothing to be proud of.

What the project team achieved is irrelevant to the discussion.

Mentioning how great it is and how much work it was is also irrelevant.

I'm not going to play "international politics"[1] with this.

There is only one issue and that is the name.  Drumming up the Indiana
release' fanboys is getting us nowhere.

Casper

[1] Making the support of resolutions condemning what X did to Y 
conditional on saying that "Y" isn't altogether nice also.



From dclarke at blastwave.org  Fri Nov  2 11:27:15 2007
From: dclarke at blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 14:27:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
 sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <723FC586-F043-4ACA-AF56-ECBC904A3566@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
	<723FC586-F043-4ACA-AF56-ECBC904A3566@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1466.72.39.216.186.1194028035.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>


>
> On Nov 2, 2007, at 10:16, Ian Murdock wrote:
>
>> All right.
>>
>> I don't even know where to begin.
>
> hear hear!  thanks for your candid insight Ian! .. i've only been at
> sun for about 10 years now, but from what i've seen it's always been
> a chaotic mess of consolidations replete with long pointless debates
> and packaging nightmares
>
> i'm sure i'm not the only one who *really* welcomes your efforts to
> move matterhorns of crusty historic cruft that seem to have existed
> for eons with solaris .. from my 100000 mile view - it seems to me
> that the opensolaris/linux comparison really breaks down since linux
> is really focused on the kernel, and opensolaris is really based on a
> meta consolidation - you're always going to have a few vocal
> advocates for how things should really be branded (eg: RMS and GNU/
> Linux) .. but damn the politics and keep pressing on!

I am 100% behind this great work and I could not agree more.
If Dr. Salk and Dr. Sabin were to release the polio vaccine today
then I think that people would line up and take it regardless of
the name. I think that the "OpenSolaris Developer Preview" is a
serious shot in the arm for the OpenSolaris Community and it cures
some tragic flaws.

My opinion.

Dennis Clarke
http://www.blastwave.org/

ps : I have work to do in order to get software available via a
     public community based software repository.




From sommerfeld at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 11:28:45 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:28:45 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	I'm	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B6713.3060703@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<472B6713.3060703@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1194028125.13457.26.camel@thunk>

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:06 -0500, Sara Dornsife wrote:

> > As members
> > of our community's elected body have made exhaustively clear, there is
> > a consensus that a single OpenSolaris-derived distribution -- even one
> > emanating from Sun -- should not have exclusive use of the name
> > "OpenSolaris". 
> 
> There has absolutely not been consensus reached. 

In the broader community, no, but in the OGB, yes:

See
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007-November/000322.html

Glynn Foster has recused himself from the discussion.

All other OGB members have been critical of the choice of name.




From alan.coopersmith at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 11:28:59 2007
From: alan.coopersmith at sun.com (Alan Coopersmith)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:28:59 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B6C6B.9080102@sun.com>

Ian Murdock wrote:
> All right.
> 
> I don't even know where to begin.

I don't think anyone disputes that there is a lot of good being
overshadowed by a few small decisions that have large impact.

I just don't get why it would have been so bad for the binaries
shipped this week to be labeled as "Project Indiana Developer
Preview", and then wait a few weeks to let the trademark/branding
guideline project finish their guidelines and to let the community
try out Project Indiana first.   You would have most likely gotten
to the same endpoint of releasing a binary distro named OpenSolaris
in March, but without appearing to be heavily handed in dictating these
decisions, alienating members of the community, and filling our mailboxes
to overflowing.   (Just imagine the cost to Sun of all the bandwidth
and storage being wasted by this unnecessary flamefest.)

> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?

No, it doesn't matter if you're inviting the community to participate
in a discussion, and then unilaterally declare the decision made by
Sun, before the community has finished reaching a decision on those
guidelines.    Was the community process going so slowly after only a
couple of weeks that it was necessary to short-circuit it?

If Sun was being held to the same standard as everyone else, we'd be
removing Project Indiana binaries from the website right now for misuse
of the trademark outside the established guidelines published on
OpenSolaris.org.

> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?

Maybe you should go have a long talk with Sun's Chief Open Source Officer,
who explained to many of Sun's engineers working on open source projects
a few weeks ago the highly non-rational, but repeatedly proven rule of
dealing with open source communities:

	Control and influence are inversely proportional.

The more control you try to take, even over things like the name that you
may consider less significant, the less influence you will have with the
members of the community.

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering



From bmc at eng.sun.com  Fri Nov  2 11:22:19 2007
From: bmc at eng.sun.com (Bryan Cantrill)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:22:19 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss]   I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B6713.3060703@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<472B6713.3060703@sun.com>
Message-ID: <20071102182219.GQ417426@eng.sun.com>


> >>And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> >>community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> >>being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> >>repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> >>thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> >>Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> >>abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
> >>
> >>Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> >>so therefore we've given nothing?
> >>
> >>I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
> >>    
> >
> >I assume that you actually _do_ get it -- that your plea of ignorance is
> >rhetorical ploy and not an actual confession of limited mental capacity --
> >but for the sake of argument, allow me to clarify:  the issue is
> >nomenclature.  That's it; it's not more complicated than that.  As members
> >of our community's elected body have made exhaustively clear, there is
> >a consensus that a single OpenSolaris-derived distribution -- even one
> >emanating from Sun -- should not have exclusive use of the name
> >"OpenSolaris".  That is, a distribution should be allowed to be derived
> >from OpenSolaris, but no one distribution should be allowed to simply
> >_be_ OpenSolaris.  
> >  
> 
> There has absolutely not been consensus reached.

Really?  I'm looking at the OGB members weighing in on Keith's proposal
(OGB/2007/004) on ogb-discuss, and it sure looks like rough consensus to
me -- and I think that the OGB sentiment is pretty representative of what
we're seeing on the larger lists.  I guess we'll see when the OGB votes
on this next Wednesday, but I don't see the evidence to conclude that
the OGB is not converging on this issue.

> >So I guess it's my turn to say that I don't get it:  given that this is
> >such a small issue -- and one in which our elected body is so clearly
> >speaking with one voice -- why do you insist on persisting down what is
> >clearly such a divisive path?
> >  
> 
> This is obviously NOT a small issue.

Well, of course not -- nomenclature is very important.  But I think it's
quite small in terms of the success of Indiana (as others have pointed 
out, the positive reviews have nothing to do with the nomenclature), which
is why I'm a bit baffled as to why this divisive path has not only been
taken, but insisted upon...

	- Bryan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan Cantrill, Sun Microsystems FishWorks.       http://blogs.sun.com/bmc


From elw at stderr.org  Fri Nov  2 11:33:23 2007
From: elw at stderr.org (elw at stderr.org)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 13:33:23 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021318130.7623@illuminati.stderr.org>


> those same people for our trouble, and in return thinks it reasonable to 
> have _some_ say in how the community functions? Or is that a sign of 
> evil intentions? Do we have to completely abdicate to "be community"? 
> Isn't that taxation without representation?
>
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything, 
> so therefore we've given nothing?
>
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.

The community needs *much* more time to come to consensus and develop 
opinions re: ongoing trademark policy.

Maybe 3-4x what has been available thus far?

--e


From Alan.Burlison at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 11:36:57 2007
From: Alan.Burlison at sun.com (Alan Burlison)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:36:57 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B6E49.5000204@sun.com>

Ian Murdock wrote:

> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
> 
> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
> 
> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
> 
> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?

I'm not clear what you are saying here - which parts of the above
paragraphs are about Indiana, and which are about the OpenSolaris
community?  OpenSolaris is more than just Indiana, and most of the
things you refer to were happening before your arrival.  I guess you may
have no idea who I am, but I started working on OpenSolaris over 4 years
ago, in fact I believe I was the first Sun employee to start on
full-time on the project.  I therefore think I've got a reasonably
accurate view of the historical context.

As for holding people to standards, all I've seen is the not entirely
unreasonable request that Sun continue to deliver the commitments to
openness and transparency that it made when OpenSolaris was started.

> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
> 
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?

Again, I'm not at all clear why you have that impression.  Nobody is
saying that you shouldn't have a voice, what they are asking is that you
use the mechanisms and channels we have in place for such discussions to
take place.  I think it is important to see the dispute in context.  I
haven't seen anyone say that they think Indiana is an evil idea (in fact
quite the opposite), what they have been annoyed at is that decisions
that affect the community were apparently taken without involving the
community.

The dispute is about one area of the project as a whole.  I know that it
is one that is close to your heart, but please let's not let this one
issue result in the trashing of the entire opensolaris 'idea'.  After
all, we, Sun chose to go down this route in the first place, it is we
who must take the responsibility of delivering on what we committed to.

> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.

That, at least, seems clear.

-- 
Alan Burlison
--



From alan.coopersmith at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 11:37:11 2007
From: alan.coopersmith at sun.com (Alan Coopersmith)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:37:11 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] I'm	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194028125.13457.26.camel@thunk>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<472B6713.3060703@sun.com> <1194028125.13457.26.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <472B6E57.6050904@sun.com>

Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:06 -0500, Sara Dornsife wrote:
> 
>>> As members
>>> of our community's elected body have made exhaustively clear, there is
>>> a consensus that a single OpenSolaris-derived distribution -- even one
>>> emanating from Sun -- should not have exclusive use of the name
>>> "OpenSolaris". 
>> There has absolutely not been consensus reached. 
> 
> In the broader community, no, but in the OGB, yes:
> 
> See
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007-November/000322.html
> 
> Glynn Foster has recused himself from the discussion.
> 
> All other OGB members have been critical of the choice of name.

I would clarify that the OGB doesn't have a consensus, nor even had a discussion
really yet, on whether there should ever be a distribution with exclusive use
of the name, just that the name shouldn't be taken exclusively by a distribution
the community hasn't agreed to endorse that way, nor even seen until after it
was announced it was using the name.

I suspect we'll get to the same end result someday, but as a deliberate
decision made by the community.

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering



From james.d.carlson at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 11:39:00 2007
From: james.d.carlson at Sun.COM (James Carlson)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 14:39:00 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss]  [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
 but I just	don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194027960.3845.68.camel@cranialtrauma>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<1194027960.3845.68.camel@cranialtrauma>
Message-ID: <18219.28356.303093.99393@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

Tim Foster writes:
> We all thought it was okay to burn fossil fuels a few years ago; there
> was a community consensus even that it was okay - this appears to be a
> similar issue (though of less global importance I admit).

That's weak.

My reduction (or increase or lack of change altogether) in use of
fossil fuels does not materially affect your ability to use them.  The
growing consensus on the matter is an influence, but does not force my
hand or yours.

Insisting that there is only one true reference distribution of
OpenSolaris, and that Indiana -- not Nexenta, not SchilliX, not any
other -- delivers it, does indeed limit the ability of others to use
the same name.

It places constraints on the community and prevents other actions in
the future.  If Joerg wants to make SchilliX into _the_ reference
distribution as an alternative to Indiana, he cannot.  There already
is one reference, and two would be at least one too many.

In addition, it disenfranchises the other distributions.  They're not
equal.  They're lesser variants that, just by definition, cannot be as
compatible to real OpenSolaris in as much as they're intentionally not
identical.

I think the theory that some are operating under here is that all
community property (such as the exclusive use of this name) is up for
grabs, and the community itself needn't be involved in the decision to
use it.  The burden, in this view, would be on the second person to
lay the same claim: Joerg would need to wrest control back by asking
for a vote, with the distinct advantage going to the existing user.

Given the relatively young state of the OpenSolaris community, I think
that's a dangerous position to take.  The consensus on the other side
-- that a trademark policy is needed and that a community-wide vote
should precede exclusive use of community space -- seems more prudent
to me.

-- 
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


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 12:06:01 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:06:01 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <1193978477.8333.263.camel@thunk>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728A744.8060505@sun.com> <4729291F.6080703@gmx.com>
	<b9c544f0710311827q44d0424ar7e9f16cfb1788ce1@mail.gmail.com>
	<47292D1E.5050401@gmx.com> <47293496.2030205@Sun.Com>
	<47293D10.6030102@gmx.com> <47294EFC.9070802@Sun.Com>
	<5b5090780711011519v1af8ac70nd61df6a71e38f068@mail.gmail.com>
	<472AA39C.2070806@Sun.Com> <1193978477.8333.263.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <472B7519.1070704@Sun.Com>

Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 21:12 -0700, John Plocher wrote:
>>  In addition, the OpenSolaris
>> community itself produces a distro that is compatible.
> 
> I think "a distro" is unnecessarily constraining.

+1

I used the term in a "at this current time" context;
as I've said before, I expect that at some point in time
we will have a series of focused or niche distros:

	Indiana 10/07, Indiana 4/08, ...
	SomethingMajor11
	Kansas 10/09, Kansas 4/10, ...

as well as

	An Appliance thingie
	A Storage/ZFS thingie
	A Web Stack thingie
	etc

   -John


From rich.green at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 12:55:48 2007
From: rich.green at sun.com (Rich Green)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:55:48 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194025604.3845.60.camel@cranialtrauma>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025604.3845.60.camel@cranialtrauma>
Message-ID: <472B80C4.7060909@sun.com>

Thank you both for your comments.
Specifically for the eyes and ears of all of the folks on the 
OpenSolaris software team, I can't thank you enough for the outstanding 
work you've done to date on this program. The creativity, speed and 
focus you've all demonstrated is visible to all - and is worthy of 
unyielding respect. You certainly have mine.
Thanks,
Rich

Tim Foster wrote:
> +1 This says it all for me. I'm also getting pretty sick of the rather
> negative atmosphere around the mailing lists at the moment.
>
> We just shipped a major milestone, and people are doing nothing but
> bitching about it.  I'm glad the responsible project team are a pretty
> thick skinned bunch, because I'd be feeling rather unappreciated if I
> were them, based on many of these mails... (perhaps they're all still
> recovering from the party)
>
> Can we please start feeling proud of our achievements ? Please ? Beers
> all round!
> 	
> 	cheers,
> 		tim
>
>
> On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:16 -0400, Ian Murdock wrote:
>   
>> All right.
>>
>> I don't even know where to begin.
>>
>> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
>> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
>> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
>>
>> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
>> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
>> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
>>
>> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
>> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
>> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
>> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
>> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
>> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
>>
>> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
>> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
>> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
>> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
>> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
>> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
>> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
>>
>> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
>> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
>> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
>> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
>> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
>> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
>> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
>>
>> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
>> so therefore we've given nothing?
>>
>> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>>
>> -ian
>>     


From Jonathan.Edwards at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 12:19:41 2007
From: Jonathan.Edwards at Sun.COM (Jonathan Edwards)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:19:41 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [ogb-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <F417F5C1-B4C8-418F-AF7E-28CBDB5B02E6@sun.com>


On Nov 2, 2007, at 10:42, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:

> On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:16 -0400, Ian Murdock wrote:
>> I don't even know where to begin.
>
> You should start with the choice of name.
>
> Names are very important.

I don't agree Bill .. this focus on names and renaming and rebranding  
that seems to keep cropping up every couple of years around here  
looks (to me) more like a cult that keeps changing it's name in order  
to disassociate with their bad history and confuse new converts .. if  
we're not fixing the underlying process problems, masking it with a  
name change really doesn't do anything but expose the same sets of  
problems while exponentially adding new ones .. don't get me wrong,  
Open[ing] Solaris - absolutely huge, but arguing about what can be  
named OpenSolaris[TM] is almost like arguing about someone else named  
"Bill" (hmm .. wild Bill[TM] Hickok is souring my good name) and  
fearing that "Bill" the person might be confused with "bill" the  
financial statement i just got in the mail, or maybe that "Guy" the  
person[TM] is confused with "guy" what Guy really is ..

language is really about use (apologies to wittgenstein), and naming  
should really wash out into usage .. call it "oscar odd couple  
release" for all i [we?] care .. as long as we're talking about the  
same thing and the underlying bits are good it'll develop a life of  
it's own without all this pointless name wrangling

just my $2 (inflation you know)
---
.je


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 12:26:57 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 14:26:57 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Bryan Cantrill <bmc at eng.sun.com> wrote:
>
> Ian,
>
> > All right.
> >
> > I don't even know where to begin.
> >
> > Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> > the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> > OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
> >
> > Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> > has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> > world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
> >
> > Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> > are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> > to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> > focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> > company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> > of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
> >
> > Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> > in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> > brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> > to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> > a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> > for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> > case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
> >
> > And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> > community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> > being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> > repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> > thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> > Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> > abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
> >
> > Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> > so therefore we've given nothing?
> >
> > I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>
> I assume that you actually _do_ get it -- that your plea of ignorance is
> rhetorical ploy and not an actual confession of limited mental capacity --
> but for the sake of argument, allow me to clarify:  the issue is
> nomenclature.  That's it; it's not more complicated than that.  As members
> of our community's elected body have made exhaustively clear, there is
> a consensus that a single OpenSolaris-derived distribution -- even one
> emanating from Sun -- should not have exclusive use of the name
> "OpenSolaris".  That is, a distribution should be allowed to be derived
> from OpenSolaris, but no one distribution should be allowed to simply
> _be_ OpenSolaris.

Consensus? Among whom? It should be obvious that there are actually
many people in this community that do believe there should be one
*reference* distribution called OpenSolaris.

You didn't ask me for my vote on it; so your consensus is among
yourselves; not the community. If you still think it is, then you must
be using an interesting definition of consensus.

> So I guess it's my turn to say that I don't get it:  given that this is
> such a small issue -- and one in which our elected body is so clearly
> speaking with one voice -- why do you insist on persisting down what is
> clearly such a divisive path?

Such a small issue? Obviously it isn't, or our inboxes wouldn't be exploding.

I also think it's a bit silly to say that the elected body is speaking
with one voice. If I recall correctly, Glynn abstained.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 12:40:33 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:40:33 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com>

[Followups to trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org]

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Compatiblitiy is less trivial than you might belive but without conformance 
> tests, we cannot claim anything about compatibility

 > ...

> 
> A distro alone cannot be a refernce. It must not even be changed for 
> the compatibility tests.

One of my comments on the wiki definition was along the lines of:

     We could, as a starting place for defining compatibility,
     simply assert that there is a baseline (installer and
     a set of versioned packages; a "recipe", if you will)
     that must exist in any distro if it wants to claim
     compatibility.

Of course, this type of definition is poor, from many perspectives.
It is, however, easy to implement :-)

It presumes significant sameness between distros - not a bad thing
from a compatibility perspective.  Same installer, same kernel, same
packaging system, same repositories...

But, it is a starting point that we can use today, rather than
waiting for someone to develop a full blown, ratified test suite...

   -John






From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 13:01:57 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 21:01:57 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com> 
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-ID: <200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>


>Consensus? Among whom? It should be obvious that there are actually
>many people in this community that do believe there should be one
>*reference* distribution called OpenSolaris.

That is not the argument, and you know it.  The argument is that no single
project is allowed to take the OpenSolaris name and claim that it owns it.
I think there is no argument that Indiana has done so.

>You didn't ask me for my vote on it; so your consensus is among
>yourselves; not the community. If you still think it is, then you must
>be using an interesting definition of consensus.


>I also think it's a bit silly to say that the elected body is speaking
>with one voice. If I recall correctly, Glynn abstained.

As Glynn works for Ian he is in a rather more difficult position than all 
of us.

Casper



From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 13:04:58 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:04:58 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
>
> >Consensus? Among whom? It should be obvious that there are actually
> >many people in this community that do believe there should be one
> >*reference* distribution called OpenSolaris.
>
> That is not the argument, and you know it.  The argument is that no single
> project is allowed to take the OpenSolaris name and claim that it owns it.
> I think there is no argument that Indiana has done so.
>
> >You didn't ask me for my vote on it; so your consensus is among
> >yourselves; not the community. If you still think it is, then you must
> >be using an interesting definition of consensus.
>
>
> >I also think it's a bit silly to say that the elected body is speaking
> >with one voice. If I recall correctly, Glynn abstained.
>
> As Glynn works for Ian he is in a rather more difficult position than all
> of us.

Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies
unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of
the OGB feels X way."

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 13:16:10 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:16:10 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Comments on Trademark usage and Branding
	guideline
In-Reply-To: <1194014986.2588.13.camel@localhost>
References: <1194014986.2588.13.camel@localhost>
Message-ID: <472B858A.8090105@Sun.Com>

Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> 0) there should be higher level guidance/goals/rationale on the trademark policy.

I added your suggestions/comments to the wiki

   Thanks!
    -John



From Casper.Dik at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 13:17:16 2007
From: Casper.Dik at Sun.COM (Casper.Dik at Sun.COM)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 21:17:16 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com> 
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-ID: <200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>



>Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies
>unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of
>the OGB feels X way."

That is not how abstentions are generally counted.


Casper



From Marty.Duey at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 13:26:23 2007
From: Marty.Duey at Sun.COM (Marty Duey)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:26:23 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472b4b34.TDhpMS2cDepiT4fV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728AEC1.1010705@Sun.Com>
	<4729acea.oXLYLq9aVBQxQvmB%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4729EED0.6040105@Sun.Com>
	<4729fde2.jARfVhC61vky209P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711011543h5f21c5b4xe3a08866ba1acd10@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b0de7.CxaMHtdFzQhdk9B5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020652y140cc8d9gde4e3fd1df938f53@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b3bde.8YzSz3/Xtn2xDmhG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0711020856v4d1cfd51pbd5da41e8244c7b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<472b4b34.TDhpMS2cDepiT4fV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472B87EF.50007@sun.com>

Can someone please fix the discussion list mail server or am I the only 
one getting a second helping of the same messages?  It's tough enough to 
go through them all (including the cross-postings) the first time, but 
having to do it again is killer.

Thanks,

Marty

On 11/2/2007 10:07 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:

> "Shawn Walker" <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Jorg, blaming individuals for the lack of integration of star isn't
>>going to help anyone. Roland got ksh93 integrated so I have complete
>>faith you can get start integrated if you are willing to do the work
>>and *compromise* (e.g. deal with the whole compatibility with SUN tar
>>despite its problems).
> 
> 
> You forget that _you_ are blaming me and this is absolutely not helpful as
> I am not responsible for the lack of interest to get a better tar in Solaris.
> 
> It would help a lot oif you did stop repeating these unhelful claims.
> 
> 
> 
>>Actually, I'd be more than willing to help you get star integrated; I
>>like it that much. However, I have not yet volunteered for that as I
> 
> 
> 
> I did not see you in any code related discussion here..... please explain.
> 
> J?rg
> 

-- 
      _/_/_/                     Marty Duey
     _/      _/   _/  _/   _/    Partner Development Manager
    _/_/_/  _/   _/  _/_/ _/     Partner Marketing
       _/  _/   _/  _/ _/_/      Email: marty.duey at sun.com
  _/_/_/   _/_/_/  _/   _/       Direct: 303.223.6141
                                 Internal: x69342
   M I C R O S Y S T E M S



From sommerfeld at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 13:27:57 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:27:57 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Comments on Trademark usage and	Branding
	guideline
In-Reply-To: <472B858A.8090105@Sun.Com>
References: <1194014986.2588.13.camel@localhost>  <472B858A.8090105@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <1194035277.13457.58.camel@thunk>


On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 13:16 -0700, John Plocher wrote:
> Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> > 0) there should be higher level guidance/goals/rationale on the trademark policy.
> 
> I added your suggestions/comments to the wiki

I've added a few more "BillS:" annotations similar to the ones you
added.





From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 13:34:45 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:34:45 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies
> >unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of
> >the OGB feels X way."
>
> That is not how abstentions are generally counted.

Well, sorry, but for those not used the extreme level of bureaucracy
(which isn't your fault) surrounding this project. Can you please use
"laymen's terms"? Seriously. Otherwise, you're going to be implying
things you don't mean to because people don't take the same meaning
from your wording.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 13:41:14 2007
From: Sara.Dornsife at Sun.COM (Sara Dornsife)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:41:14 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com>

Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>> Consensus? Among whom? It should be obvious that there are actually
>> many people in this community that do believe there should be one
>> *reference* distribution called OpenSolaris.
>>     
>
> That is not the argument, and you know it.  The argument is that no single
> project is allowed to take the OpenSolaris name and claim that it owns it.
>   

If no single project is allowed to take the OpenSolaris name and that it 
owns it? If the argument is not about "one *reference* distribution 
called OpenSolaris, can you please reconcile these two things for me?

> I think there is no argument that Indiana has done so.
>
>   
>> You didn't ask me for my vote on it; so your consensus is among
>> yourselves; not the community. If you still think it is, then you must
>> be using an interesting definition of consensus.
>>     
>
>
>   
>> I also think it's a bit silly to say that the elected body is speaking
>> with one voice. If I recall correctly, Glynn abstained.
>>     
>
> As Glynn works for Ian he is in a rather more difficult position than all 
> of us.
>   

Glynn actually works for me I am proud to say.

> Casper
>
> _______________________________________________
> indiana-discuss mailing list
> indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/53c5d38a/attachment.html>

From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 13:55:36 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:55:36 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [ogb-discuss]
 I'm	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
	<472B64AF.2070205@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472B8EC8.6020203@Sun.Com>

Sara Dornsife wrote:
>> It's all about the name.  Back away from "OpenSolaris Developer Preview"
>> and this nightmare will end.
>>   
> 
> And then what? I hope that doesn't sound facetious, I'm really asking 
> what you see as next steps.

Seriously:  Mend your bridges with the community you diss'ed:

     Engage with the Desktop, HPC, Install/Pkging and ARC communities
     by asking something like "we would like to make the Indiana Project
     into something that could be named "OpenSolaris-foo - how can you
     help us/what do we need to do to get to that point?"

You could also try having a public conversation on the topic of

     "We've got a developer preview ready, and would like to position
     it as an OpenSolaris Developer Preview.  How can we do that in a
     way that engages (rather than disenfranchises) the larger community?"

Usually, the flow is

     Get an idea, discuss it with all of the stakeholders,
     come to a mutually agreeable conclusion, then act in concert
     on the result.

The Indiana developer preview naming decision seems to instead
have done

     Get an idea, discuss it with executives at Sun, announce
     the results to the stakeholders as an already-decided fact
     and start acting unilaterally on the result.

The first builds a community, the second erodes one.

   -John


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 13:58:24 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:58:24 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
	[ogb-discuss] I'm sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B8EC8.6020203@Sun.Com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <1194025366.13457.11.camel@thunk>
	<472B64AF.2070205@sun.com> <472B8EC8.6020203@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021358j62af4e8i9145df1e14f11167@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
> The Indiana developer preview naming decision seems to instead
> have done
>
>      Get an idea, discuss it with executives at Sun, announce
>      the results to the stakeholders as an already-decided fact
>      and start acting unilaterally on the result.
>
> The first builds a community, the second erodes one.

John that isn't fair. You were at the summit, if you remember, we had
quite a long and heated discussion with folks that weren't even
associated with Sun about the name as well as on the mailing lists for
a few weeks before any action was taken.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From elw at stderr.org  Fri Nov  2 14:02:24 2007
From: elw at stderr.org (elw at stderr.org)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:02:24 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss] I'm
 sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021555550.26187@illuminati.stderr.org>



>>> Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies 
>>> unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of 
>>> the OGB feels X way."
>>
>> That is not how abstentions are generally counted.
>
> Well, sorry, but for those not used the extreme level of bureaucracy 
> (which isn't your fault) surrounding this project. Can you please use 
> "laymen's terms"? Seriously. Otherwise, you're going to be implying 
> things you don't mean to because people don't take the same meaning from 
> your wording.


Abstention is a removal of oneself from a process, generally due to a 
serious conflict of interest (generally, an inability to provide an 
unbiased response) of one sort or another.

Proper consideration of the OGB's position on an issue should actually be 
consideration of all the members of the OGB who have not abstained from 
discussion.  The full set minus abstentions.

It sounds like the OGB is being rather consistent.

--elijah


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 14:04:08 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:04:08 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021555550.26187@illuminati.stderr.org>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021555550.26187@illuminati.stderr.org>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021404r4975385cobba7d2c34ab924ba@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, elw at stderr.org <elw at stderr.org> wrote:
>
>
> >>> Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies
> >>> unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of
> >>> the OGB feels X way."
> >>
> >> That is not how abstentions are generally counted.
> >
> > Well, sorry, but for those not used the extreme level of bureaucracy
> > (which isn't your fault) surrounding this project. Can you please use
> > "laymen's terms"? Seriously. Otherwise, you're going to be implying
> > things you don't mean to because people don't take the same meaning from
> > your wording.
>
>
> Abstention is a removal of oneself from a process, generally due to a
> serious conflict of interest (generally, an inability to provide an
> unbiased response) of one sort or another.
>
> Proper consideration of the OGB's position on an issue should actually be
> consideration of all the members of the OGB who have not abstained from
> discussion.  The full set minus abstentions.
>
> It sounds like the OGB is being rather consistent.

Consistent and understandable to people not used to layers of
bureaucracy are two different things. All I'm asking for is to be
approachable and clear in communication.

What I get instead is a torrent emails repeating some lame dictionary
definitions many people probably aren't familiar with.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From sommerfeld at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 13:55:11 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:55:11 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] I'm sorry, but	I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1194036911.13457.82.camel@thunk>


On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 15:41 -0500, Sara Dornsife wrote:
> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: 

> > That is not the argument, and you know it.  The argument is that no single
> > project is allowed to take the OpenSolaris name and claim that it owns it.
> >   
> 
> If no single project is allowed to take the OpenSolaris name and that
> it owns it? If the argument is not about "one *reference* distribution
> called OpenSolaris, can you please reconcile these two things for me?

I don't see any conflict.  

No project is allowed to *TAKE* the name for its own use.

The community may (or may not) choose to *GIVE* the name to the project
to use.

					- Bill




From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 13:57:12 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:57:12 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] I'm sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194036911.13457.82.camel@thunk>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com> <1194036911.13457.82.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021357n590a83e4s6ae515d94410fbc5@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld at sun.com> wrote:
> The community may (or may not) choose to *GIVE* the name to the project
> to use.

The community hasn't been given the right to give the name to anybody,
or for that matter, take it from anybody. The community explicitly has
no rights over the name whatsoever.

You can't enforce policy that doesn't exist. A policy surrounding the
trademark should have been defined at the inception of the community.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From sommerfeld at sun.com  Fri Nov  2 14:00:18 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:00:18 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
	[osol-discuss] I'm sorry, but	I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711021357n590a83e4s6ae515d94410fbc5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com> <1194036911.13457.82.camel@thunk>
	<b9c544f0711021357n590a83e4s6ae515d94410fbc5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1194037218.13457.87.camel@thunk>


On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 15:57 -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> The community hasn't been given the right to give the name to anybody,
> or for that matter, take it from anybody. The community explicitly has
> no rights over the name whatsoever.

so, either one of two things has happened:

 1) the project is a subsidiary part of the community; if the community
doesn't have the authority to use the name, neither does the project.

 2) the project is not a subsidiary part of the community and has no
authority to say its output is the work of the community as a whole.

> You can't enforce policy that doesn't exist. A policy surrounding the
> trademark should have been defined at the inception of the community.

until the policy exists, the project can't possibly have authority to
use the trademark.

						- Bill




From garrett at damore.org  Fri Nov  2 14:41:18 2007
From: garrett at damore.org (Garrett D'Amore)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:41:18 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] I'm sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711021357n590a83e4s6ae515d94410fbc5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
	<20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>	<472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com>
	<1194036911.13457.82.camel@thunk>
	<b9c544f0711021357n590a83e4s6ae515d94410fbc5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472B997E.6040709@damore.org>

Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 02/11/2007, Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld at sun.com> wrote:
>   
>> The community may (or may not) choose to *GIVE* the name to the project
>> to use.
>>     
>
> The community hasn't been given the right to give the name to anybody,
> or for that matter, take it from anybody. The community explicitly has
> no rights over the name whatsoever.
>
> You can't enforce policy that doesn't exist. A policy surrounding the
> trademark should have been defined at the inception of the community.
>
>   

And it is *precisely* because of *that* problem that I proposed that in 
the long run, we should consider one of two courses of action:

    1) get Sun to give up the rights to the mark

or

    2) create our own mark, and change our identity (sort of what all 
the Xen-derived distros had to do).

Yes, it sucks that we're at this impasse, but unless Sun is willing to 
do number 1 now, I don't see a way forward other than 2, that doesn't 
leave us with the possibility (or likelihood) of being back in the same 
boat in a year or three.  (A *possible* way would be for Sun to yield 
control by some kind of contractual commitment, while it retains 
*ownership*.  But I think that is no likelier than #1 in the first place.)

At the end of the day/month/year/decade, I think its most likely we're 
going to have to set up the non-profit, and settle on number 2.  (The 
non-profit to manage the mark is required in either case.)

Yeah, it sucks, and pulls energy that is might have been fruitfully 
spent elsewhere.  But I don't think it would be wise to be too cavalier 
about something as fundamental as our core identity.

Now, on another point, I *do* believe Indiana probably should evolve 
into The OpenSolaris distribution (or whatever reference name we are 
able to choose), because, even though it is mostly staffed by Sun, its 
truly open, and (branding aside) really does hold true (or at least more 
so than some other alternatives) to the core values embodied in the 
historical Solaris code base.  But, Sara and Ian, please give the 
community the credit and opportunity to come to that conclusion on our 
own, rather than having it forced down our throats.

    -- Garrett

PS: For the Indiana folks, they need to really *understand* what they 
are trying to sell with a brand.  If OpenSolaris' brand identity is a 
vibrant open community, then the biggest players need to participate 
accordingly.  If its just another way for Sun to push out beta bits, and 
get developer mindshare for the Sun distribution known as Solaris, then 
the whole rest of the OGB, the Constitution, etc, is all just a sham and 
we should collectively dissolve ourselves.



From ceri at submonkey.net  Fri Nov  2 14:44:51 2007
From: ceri at submonkey.net (Ceri Davies)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 21:44:51 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't	get it
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711021404r4975385cobba7d2c34ab924ba@mail.gmail.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021555550.26187@illuminati.stderr.org>
	<b9c544f0711021404r4975385cobba7d2c34ab924ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20071102214450.GJ39181@submonkey.net>

On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 04:04:08PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 02/11/2007, elw at stderr.org <elw at stderr.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >>> Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies
> > >>> unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of
> > >>> the OGB feels X way."
> > >>
> > >> That is not how abstentions are generally counted.
> > >
> > > Well, sorry, but for those not used the extreme level of bureaucracy
> > > (which isn't your fault) surrounding this project. Can you please use
> > > "laymen's terms"? Seriously. Otherwise, you're going to be implying
> > > things you don't mean to because people don't take the same meaning from
> > > your wording.
> >
> >
> > Abstention is a removal of oneself from a process, generally due to a
> > serious conflict of interest (generally, an inability to provide an
> > unbiased response) of one sort or another.
> >
> > Proper consideration of the OGB's position on an issue should actually be
> > consideration of all the members of the OGB who have not abstained from
> > discussion.  The full set minus abstentions.
> >
> > It sounds like the OGB is being rather consistent.
> 
> Consistent and understandable to people not used to layers of
> bureaucracy are two different things. All I'm asking for is to be
> approachable and clear in communication.
> 
> What I get instead is a torrent emails repeating some lame dictionary
> definitions many people probably aren't familiar with.

Shawn, "abstain" only has one meaning.  It's perfectly consistent and in
layman's terms as it stands.

Ceri
-- 
That must be wonderful!  I don't understand it at all.
                                                  -- Moliere
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/dba43839/attachment.bin>

From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 14:48:42 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:48:42 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <20071102214450.GJ39181@submonkey.net>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021555550.26187@illuminati.stderr.org>
	<b9c544f0711021404r4975385cobba7d2c34ab924ba@mail.gmail.com>
	<20071102214450.GJ39181@submonkey.net>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021448r17d16909oe753e613323b5136@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 04:04:08PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> > On 02/11/2007, elw at stderr.org <elw at stderr.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >>> Then you shouldn't say you speak with "one voice" because that implies
> > > >>> unanimity which is not the case here. You should say "the majority of
> > > >>> the OGB feels X way."
> > > >>
> > > >> That is not how abstentions are generally counted.
> > > >
> > > > Well, sorry, but for those not used the extreme level of bureaucracy
> > > > (which isn't your fault) surrounding this project. Can you please use
> > > > "laymen's terms"? Seriously. Otherwise, you're going to be implying
> > > > things you don't mean to because people don't take the same meaning from
> > > > your wording.
> > >
> > >
> > > Abstention is a removal of oneself from a process, generally due to a
> > > serious conflict of interest (generally, an inability to provide an
> > > unbiased response) of one sort or another.
> > >
> > > Proper consideration of the OGB's position on an issue should actually be
> > > consideration of all the members of the OGB who have not abstained from
> > > discussion.  The full set minus abstentions.
> > >
> > > It sounds like the OGB is being rather consistent.
> >
> > Consistent and understandable to people not used to layers of
> > bureaucracy are two different things. All I'm asking for is to be
> > approachable and clear in communication.
> >
> > What I get instead is a torrent emails repeating some lame dictionary
> > definitions many people probably aren't familiar with.
>
> Shawn, "abstain" only has one meaning.  It's perfectly consistent and in
> layman's terms as it stands.

Abstain has only one meaning but was not used in the context given.
The key phrase that I saw was "with one voice" which clearly has a
completely different meaning to many people. So please stop playing
word games with me.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From garrett at damore.org  Fri Nov  2 14:47:23 2007
From: garrett at damore.org (Garrett D'Amore)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:47:23 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] [indiana-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] I'm sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1194037218.13457.87.camel@thunk>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
	<20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>	<472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com>
	<1194036911.13457.82.camel@thunk>	<b9c544f0711021357n590a83e4s6ae515d94410fbc5@mail.gmail.com>
	<1194037218.13457.87.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <472B9AEB.8090306@damore.org>

Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 15:57 -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
>   
>> The community hasn't been given the right to give the name to anybody,
>> or for that matter, take it from anybody. The community explicitly has
>> no rights over the name whatsoever.
>>     
>
> so, either one of two things has happened:
>
>  1) the project is a subsidiary part of the community; if the community
> doesn't have the authority to use the name, neither does the project.
>
>  2) the project is not a subsidiary part of the community and has no
> authority to say its output is the work of the community as a whole.
>
>   
>> You can't enforce policy that doesn't exist. A policy surrounding the
>> trademark should have been defined at the inception of the community.
>>     
>
> until the policy exists, the project can't possibly have authority to
> use the trademark.
>   

Of course it can.  It gets the authority directly from the mark's owner 
(Sun.)  The fact that it disenfranchises the entire rest of the 
community not to be able to use or control its own name, is entirely 
beside the point.

    -- Garrett



From swalker at opensolaris.org  Fri Nov  2 14:54:36 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:54:36 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <20071102215214.GK39181@submonkey.net>
References: <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021555550.26187@illuminati.stderr.org>
	<b9c544f0711021404r4975385cobba7d2c34ab924ba@mail.gmail.com>
	<20071102214450.GJ39181@submonkey.net>
	<b9c544f0711021448r17d16909oe753e613323b5136@mail.gmail.com>
	<20071102215214.GK39181@submonkey.net>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711021454n2e4d8db9idb45c05b9cbb6eb5@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/2007, Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 04:48:42PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> > On 02/11/2007, Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Shawn, "abstain" only has one meaning.  It's perfectly consistent and in
> > > layman's terms as it stands.
> >
> > Abstain has only one meaning but was not used in the context given.
> > The key phrase that I saw was "with one voice" which clearly has a
> > completely different meaning to many people. So please stop playing
> > word games with me.
>
> Pot.  Kettle.  Black.

Can I be the flying pig instead? That's much more believable! :)

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From ceri at submonkey.net  Fri Nov  2 14:52:14 2007
From: ceri at submonkey.net (Ceri Davies)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 21:52:14 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] I'm
	sorry, but I just don't	get it
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711021448r17d16909oe753e613323b5136@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021304m5132f3aai89d07ee3d4ec793a@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022017.lA2KHGo9026134@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021334x12df5349je77f82205a3b2df1@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021555550.26187@illuminati.stderr.org>
	<b9c544f0711021404r4975385cobba7d2c34ab924ba@mail.gmail.com>
	<20071102214450.GJ39181@submonkey.net>
	<b9c544f0711021448r17d16909oe753e613323b5136@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20071102215214.GK39181@submonkey.net>

On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 04:48:42PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 02/11/2007, Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:
>
> > Shawn, "abstain" only has one meaning.  It's perfectly consistent and in
> > layman's terms as it stands.
> 
> Abstain has only one meaning but was not used in the context given.
> The key phrase that I saw was "with one voice" which clearly has a
> completely different meaning to many people. So please stop playing
> word games with me.

Pot.  Kettle.  Black.

Ceri
-- 
That must be wonderful!  I don't understand it at all.
                                                  -- Moliere
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071102/58522018/attachment.bin>

From Jonathan.Edwards at Sun.COM  Fri Nov  2 18:50:13 2007
From: Jonathan.Edwards at Sun.COM (Jonathan Edwards)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:50:13 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [ogb-discuss]
 [osol-discuss] I'm sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B997E.6040709@damore.org>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com> <20071102174249.GO417426@eng.sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711021226l5c17d03bq309c6c06efd2b3a3@mail.gmail.com>
	<200711022001.lA2K1v0h010205@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<472B8B6A.7050500@sun.com> <1194036911.13457.82.camel@thunk>
	<b9c544f0711021357n590a83e4s6ae515d94410fbc5@mail.gmail.com>
	<472B997E.6040709@damore.org>
Message-ID: <40A04386-68FA-4EED-9454-A56B0BD0AB7B@sun.com>


On Nov 2, 2007, at 14:41, Garrett D'Amore wrote:

> Shawn Walker wrote:
>> On 02/11/2007, Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld at sun.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The community may (or may not) choose to *GIVE* the name to the  
>>> project
>>> to use.
>>>
>>
>> The community hasn't been given the right to give the name to  
>> anybody,
>> or for that matter, take it from anybody. The community explicitly  
>> has
>> no rights over the name whatsoever.
>>
>> You can't enforce policy that doesn't exist. A policy surrounding the
>> trademark should have been defined at the inception of the community.
>>
>>
>
> And it is *precisely* because of *that* problem that I proposed  
> that in
> the long run, we should consider one of two courses of action:
>
>     1) get Sun to give up the rights to the mark
>
> or
>
>     2) create our own mark, and change our identity (sort of what all
> the Xen-derived distros had to do).

and here's to the Op3nSol4riz distro .. with the "Pimpin' Phred" release


From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM  Sat Nov  3 00:33:43 2007
From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 16:33:43 +0900
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <1320.72.39.216.186.1194024273.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
	<1320.72.39.216.186.1194024273.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
Message-ID: <472C2457.6080907@sun.com>

Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> All right.
>>
>> I don't even know where to begin.
> 
> Welcome to the OpenSolaris Community where you can do great work, endless
> hours year after year and get endless heartache for it.
> 
> Ian, to be frank, you're new here.  This sort of thing has gone on for
> years and while this community is intensely intelligent it is also a
> very dysfunctional family.  

I don't think it's a dysfunctional family so much as it's the early 
stages of a democracy. It may be messy at times, but we have to get it a 
chance to develop. We wrote a Constitution for a reason. Let's work it.

Jim
-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris


From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM  Sat Nov  3 01:16:42 2007
From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 17:16:42 +0900
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311228550.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310912m73cb3bb4k29b15f7cffb2afb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d9b53db0710310938h77d08450xc0c256ed4d5de03e@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0710310944xce8c71ch560635dbcb1112c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311228550.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
Message-ID: <472C2E6A.1040005@sun.com>

Al Hopper wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:


>> The ability to use the OpenSolaris name is a privilege; not a right.
>                                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> This is absolutely correct.  And, along with the ownership of that 
> trademark comes the responsibility of having to defend its use - even 
> in the face of a McBride/SCO type (never-ending) court challenge. 
> It's Suns trademark and they have the right to use it and mandate how 
> it can/should be used.  But they are also prepared to pony up anything 
> from $100k to $1m+ to defend it.

Sun owns the trademark, true, but I trust that the intention here is to 
share the brand with the community. To me, the brand becomes much more 
valuable when it's leveraged across the entire OpenSolaris community. 
That's what I'm waiting to see here. I think we need to see the full 
branding guidelines to see the full context.


>> I've been watching OpenSolaris since it first launched and I've seen
>> more progress and interest in OpenSolaris since Project Indiana was
>> announced than ever.
> 
> +1


Please be careful when comparing the present to the past. Indiana is 
standing on the shoulders of those who have gone before in this 
community. There have been a lot of people who have brought this project 
to the point where it was ready for a distro. And actually, some would 
argue that we are not even ready for a distro since Indiana is not based 
on 100% open source code.


> And I've been in favor of this project (after I recovered from the 
> initial shock of Ian Murdock being hired by Sun) - because it means 
> that people are putting money and talented developer manhours into 
> making OpenSolaris even better.  We (as in the community) are getting 
> a new installer, a new packaging/distribution mechanism and an 
> improved patching mechanism - and thats just for starters.  Who is 
> *not* in favor of that.  How "unfair" is that!?  Are you kidding - 
> this is *great* for OpenSolaris (the Project) and I don't care who 
> thinks its unfair that Sun owns the OpenSolaris trademark and wants to 
> associate some flavor of that name to describe a resulting 
> distribution which they have largely sponsored.

But shouldn't Sun share the trademark with the community in some way? I 
know the company doesn't have to, but we are trying to build a community 
and I think that's one of the basic issues here. I wonder what the 
reaction would have been had the name been released with a set of full 
branding guidelines enabling the community to engage in the brand.

> Let's come up with a policy that we can live with and let Indiana move 
> forward.  Let OpenSolaris move forward.  I'm sorry that we all can't 
> own valuable trademarks and land our private 767s in our "back yard" - 
> but we can help make OpenSolaris (and its derivitives) the best OS on 
> the planet and we *will* have to make compromises and sacrefices to 
> make this happen.

Agree. But can we not call it the "best OS on the planet?" :) Never 
liked that tag line.

Jim
-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris


From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM  Sat Nov  3 01:23:51 2007
From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 17:23:51 +0900
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and
	the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4728db55.2Bw0Gc86eni9SRQQ%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728AFB7.8050300@truemail.co.th>
	<4728b655.0kL7dWUfJ/I74peC%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311255190.1051@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<4728db55.2Bw0Gc86eni9SRQQ%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472C3017.8060308@sun.com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Eric Boutilier <Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM> wrote:
> 
>> Joerg -- Regretably, and with the infallible wisdom of hindsight, I think it's clear that it was a mistake to not conduct the SchilliX project in the place where this Community always wanted you to conduct it. Here, /in and among/ the OpenSolaris Community Groups, Contributors, and Board.
>>
>> And given what you now desire, it appears to have been a fatal mistake.
> 
> SchilliX was registered as Open Community Project at developers.berlios.de in 
> March 2005. At that time www.opensolaris.org did not allow to register projects.

We didn't have projects at that time, but we do now and we've had them 
for quite some time, actually. I don't see why all the distros can't 
have their own project spaces on opensolaris.org. And I agree with Roy's 
idea that they should all live under a distro community group. 
Currently, the Advocacy CG sponsors the BeleniX mailing list on 
opensolaris.org.org, which we are happy to do, but shouldn't that list 
also have a project space and shouldn't that project live under a CG 
dedicated to distros such as yours?

Jim
-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris


From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM  Sat Nov  3 01:32:54 2007
From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 17:32:54 +0900
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4728eeba.lulSnFnzibj2xsGf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728AFB7.8050300@truemail.co.th>
	<4728b655.0kL7dWUfJ/I74peC%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710311255190.1051@dhcp-uita01-225-151.Central.Sun.COM>
	<4728db55.2Bw0Gc86eni9SRQQ%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728E44A.2030206@sun.com>
	<4728eeba.lulSnFnzibj2xsGf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472C3236.2020408@sun.com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:

> 
> Sun chosed to segregate opensolaris projects from other free software.

What do you mean?

> I am still not able to register a project at opensolaris.org. Registering
> a project at berlios.de takes 5 minutes to fill out some forms and to wait
> a few hours.


Have you issued a project proposal? It's easy. Look, in Advocacy we are 
giving project spaces to user groups, so why shouldn't you have a 
project space for SchilliX?


> If my memory serves me correct, even in late 2005 there was no way to get a
> opensolaris.org project at all.

This is 2007. We have projects. Find a sponsoring CG and write a 
proposal. Why is this an issue?

Jim
-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris


From Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de  Sat Nov  3 04:09:46 2007
From: Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:09:46 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <472c56fa.eMRMoH9G3J0JkYrb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>

John Plocher <John.Plocher at Sun.COM> wrote:

> [Followups to trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org]
>
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Compatiblitiy is less trivial than you might belive but without conformance 
> > tests, we cannot claim anything about compatibility
>
>  > ...
>
> > 
> > A distro alone cannot be a refernce. It must not even be changed for 
> > the compatibility tests.
>
> One of my comments on the wiki definition was along the lines of:
>
>      We could, as a starting place for defining compatibility,
>      simply assert that there is a baseline (installer and
>      a set of versioned packages; a "recipe", if you will)
>      that must exist in any distro if it wants to claim
>      compatibility.

If there are several levels, e.g.:

-	Plain ON

-	ON + X

-	ON + GNUME

it would allow to create application classes and to predict whether an 
application should run.

If somebody e.g. includes add-ons in his libc, this does not help.
This explains how hard it is to create a compliance test. Unless you know
what odd interface you need to look for, you may only realize that a program
compiled on 'A OpenSolaris' will not run on 'B OpenSolaris'.

J?rg

-- 
 EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily


From sommerfeld at sun.com  Sat Nov  3 05:36:07 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 08:36:07 -0400
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 12:40 -0700, John Plocher wrote:
> One of my comments on the wiki definition was along the lines of:
> 
>      We could, as a starting place for defining compatibility,
>      simply assert that there is a baseline (installer and
>      a set of versioned packages; a "recipe", if you will)
>      that must exist in any distro if it wants to claim
>      compatibility.
> 
> Of course, this type of definition is poor, from many perspectives.
> It is, however, easy to implement :-)

This may in fact be close to the right starting place.

At the higher levels I'd want to see a goal of:

"every piece of your distribution built from opensolaris sources should
be independently reproduceable from source, and changes between the base
opensolaris sources and the sources used in the build must be clearly
identified".

If the source changes can be identified, then an expert user can make an
independant judgement about whether the changes are sufficiently
compatible for their purposes.

we need a tight definition of "reproduceable" that excludes things that
are expected to change from build to build (such as elf timestamps and
elfsign signatures). 

At the lower levels ("built with OpenSolaris") it should suffice to
identify the specific versions of opensolaris sources which were used to
build the product.

> It presumes significant sameness between distros - not a bad thing
> from a compatibility perspective.  Same installer, same kernel, same
> packaging system, same repositories...

Given the current state of pkg, I think it's premature to require
everyone use the same packaging system.  What really matters for binary
compatibility is what the packaging system delivers onto the running
system.



From webmink at sun.com  Sat Nov  3 09:25:49 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 16:25:49 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] I'm
 sorry, but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021318130.7623@illuminati.stderr.org>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0711021318130.7623@illuminati.stderr.org>
Message-ID: <78970B5D-220C-4D56-A1A8-9B8B9C0C4835@sun.com>

[dropping a load of lists]

On Nov 2, 2007, at 18:33, elw at stderr.org wrote:

> The community needs *much* more time to come to consensus and develop
> opinions re: ongoing trademark policy.
>
> Maybe 3-4x what has been available thus far?

I completely agree with this. But then, I was accused of "delay  
tactics" when I said it :-)

S.



From webmink at sun.com  Sat Nov  3 09:48:54 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 16:48:54 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
Message-ID: <242A1752-8898-4505-8626-450B2AC2BFBD@sun.com>

[thinning lists again, it's the day for it here - I think this is a  
trademark-policy-dev topic]

On Nov 3, 2007, at 12:36, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:

> At the higher levels I'd want to see a goal of:
>
> "every piece of your distribution built from opensolaris sources  
> should
> be independently reproduceable from source, and changes between the  
> base
> opensolaris sources and the sources used in the build must be clearly
> identified".
>
> If the source changes can be identified, then an expert user can  
> make an
> independant judgement about whether the changes are sufficiently
> compatible for their purposes.

I've read a few messages about "compatibility" now that say things  
that imply compatibility is a flag for the expert developer. While  
that may be valuable, and we will want that as an element of the  
"built with OpenSolaris" brand usage (actual name TBD), I think a key  
goal has to be an indication used by the distro itself that a non- 
expert can expect to be able to point this distro at a well-known  
public repository (again, TBD) and run everything they find on it  
without an issue. That should be the gating factor for the higher,  
"$DISTRO OpenSolaris" brand (again, TBD).

I realise this raises issues for the existing distros but as far as  
the OS-using masses are concerned I think it is essential. We may  
need a middle-level brand usage for distros designed to use only non- 
GUI packages from repositories, but we have to stay focussed on the  
user and their deployer-developers rather than on us in the co- 
developer circle[1].

S.


[1] terms defined in http://blogs.sun.com/webmink/entry/community_roles


From anil.verve at gmail.com  Sat Nov  3 10:36:23 2007
From: anil.verve at gmail.com (Anil Gulecha)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 23:06:23 +0530
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] A branding proposal.
Message-ID: <148d59250711031036j7e2306adtabb1883a8ccd5000@mail.gmail.com>

So heres what I understand from the recent storm.

Sun asserted it's copyright, and put the name "Opensolaris" on Indiana
without fully consulting the community.

The + of having an 'opensolaris' distro is immediate recognition; goto
opesolaris.org and download opensolaris. "All the wood behind one
arrow".

The -, of course, is who gets to say what 'opensolaris' would be? Why
is GNOME suddenly the default desktop for opensolaris, when theres a
large userbase that would prefer KDE or XFCE (problem 1)..

This leads to the definition of 'core' to define opensolaris (to
something like ON+shell+tools). This scheme is fair to all
projects/community members, but will not allow a
downloadable/installable distribution named 'Opensolaris' to
exist(problem 2). You'd have to go with 'built on opensolaris' or
'based on OS technology'. (problem 3: the problem of large/different
descriptions, which dilutes the brand).

Somehow 'opensolaris' has a better ring than 'Indiana, built on
opensolaris'. My hunch is that in the long term this will have a
bigger impact on opensolaris adoption, as it will allow random Joe to
not worry about nomenclature; and click-and-install opensolaris. A
1000 of you go around to your favourite group and say "Get
opensolaris" which has a _significantly larger_ impact than 10 groups
of 100 going around and saying "Get A, its opensolairs", "Get B", "Get
C, its derived from opensolaris"...

So we need a way to address problems 1 and 2, which seem to be
mutually exclusive. Having an "opensolaris core", will lead to many
distros with a lot of problem 3s. We need to stick to the
"opensolaris" nomenclature as well as allow for multiple distributions
to share that. How? A proposal:

- Change naming from Opensolaris to 'Opensolaris G' or K or X
(standing for gnome, kde, xfce.. GKX are just suggestions, use
giraffe, kite, Xenu, Gnome, KDE, XFCE, or whatever)
- Indiana goes on to become Opensolaris G
- i. Define a set of core requirements that allows a distro to be
called Opensolaris <Word>.
- ii. Define a set of requirements that allow distro to be called
"based on opensolaris"
- iii. Define a set of requirements that allow distro to be called
"compatible with opensolaris"
 (The requirements for i will be significantly stricter than ii, which
is higher than iii).
 (i) can be used by distributions directly aimed at the desktop/server
community, (ii) and (iii) for DC created distros and appliance/custom
distros for specific purposes. We'll be setting high expectations for
(i) as they'll be used by a large audience)
- All of the above will be privileges. A creator can go ahead and name
his distro anything else if he so chooses.
- Basically, define a nomenclature where a random guy is going to hear
1000 guys say "opensolaris" and learn about 10 low-level differences
(GKX) later at get.opensolaris.org. (Ubuntu has done an admirable job
of keeping it's brand united, yet varied, but we do see K/Xubuntu
sidelined a little)

I am very much for a (set of) distro(s) having the name 'OpenSolaris'.
This can be, in my unable-to-express-how opinion, the single biggest
factor in attracting users. (How different really are ubuntu, red hat
and fedora to the avg desktop user? We get to not commit the mistake
that the Linux world did.) Once there are many Opensolaris
distributions, they would be judged by their merit/stability/support.

As far as Sun is concerned, it would have to give up it's exclusive
right to call a distro opensolaris, but gains a larger userbase
looking forward. Is it worth it?

Regards
Anil


From david.c.stewart at intel.com  Sat Nov  3 13:16:08 2007
From: david.c.stewart at intel.com (David C. Stewart)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 13:16:08 PDT
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Suggested name for reference Opensolaris
	distro
Message-ID: <27621809.1194120998935.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>

[This mail represents my opinion, not my employer?s of course]

I have read through all of the email copied to opensolaris-discuss.  I applaud the work to get the first Indiana milestone released.  I understand that many in the community feels like their rights were usurped through the use of the name OpenSolaris for this reference distro.

In the spirit of forward progress, I propose the following:

> Keep ?OpenSolaris? as the name of the community and the open-source technology
> Name the reference distro something else.

Max and I were IM-ing this morning and came up with a suggested name for the reference distro:

LibraSolaris

Reasons:

> It sounds like a geeky misspelling of ?Libre? which is latin for ?free? (as in speech, not beer)
> Libra is a constellation which is a collection of stars, not just a single ?sun?.
> The mascot could be the constellation, which are the scales, which suggest justice
> it kind of trips off the tongue to this English speaker (I can imagine the chants rising up at the next developer summit?)

Counter arguments ? got a million of course ? 

> It?s confusing to have a different name than ?OpenSolaris?
> Oh, I can think of more, but why not love the idea a little

You can +1 if you think it?s a good idea, if not I won?t be hurt.

Dave


From rac at eastlink.ca  Sat Nov  3 14:00:22 2007
From: rac at eastlink.ca (MC)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 14:00:22 PDT
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Suggested name for reference Opensolaris
	distro
In-Reply-To: <27621809.1194120998935.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
Message-ID: <26846313.1194123652690.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>

> LibraSolaris

Any proposal that doesn't involve Project Indiana being called "something OpenSolaris something" is a dead end IMHO.  Sun can and will call Indiana OpenSolaris (in case you didn't notice, they already have), so people need to work around that.


From stevel at opensolaris.org  Sat Nov  3 14:42:45 2007
From: stevel at opensolaris.org (Stephen Lau)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 14:42:45 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] I'm sorry,
	but I just don't get it
In-Reply-To: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
References: <472B5B62.8090201@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472CEB55.9050809@opensolaris.org>

No, to all of those things.  None of our objections are with any of your 
points; in fact all your points are valid and true - and all the 
engineering, and marketing teams involved in Indiana should be applauded 
for their efforts.

Our *only* point of contention is that your announcement of Indiana, and 
the naming of Indiana as OpenSolaris implies the community has endorsed 
Indiana as the one true binary distribution of OpenSolaris, and that is 
in fact - not true.

So here's my point:
Does it matter if a "community-developed" (Indiana's words, not mine) 
distribution uses the community's name and blessing when in fact the 
community hasn't given it?

I think it does.  Hope that helps clarify the point of contention.

cheers,
steve

Ian Murdock wrote:
> All right.
>
> I don't even know where to begin.
>
> Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to
> the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called
> OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?"
>
> Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview
> has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the
> world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING?
>
> Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we
> are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP,
> to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris
> focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the
> company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside
> of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing?
>
> Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate
> in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris
> brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible,
> to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes
> a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded
> for being willing to take this step--or is this just another
> case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else?
>
> And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this
> community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of
> being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed
> repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return
> thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions?
> Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely
> abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation?
>
> Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything,
> so therefore we've given nothing?
>
> I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit.
>
> -ian
>   



-- 
stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net



From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Sat Nov  3 17:34:11 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 17:34:11 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] A branding proposal.
In-Reply-To: <148d59250711031036j7e2306adtabb1883a8ccd5000@mail.gmail.com>
References: <148d59250711031036j7e2306adtabb1883a8ccd5000@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472D1383.4010207@Sun.Com>

[Trimmed Cc: list to just trademark-policy-dev]

Anil Gulecha wrote:
> Why
> is GNOME suddenly the default desktop for opensolaris, when theres a
> large userbase that would prefer KDE or XFCE (problem 1).
> ...
> - Change naming from Opensolaris to 'Opensolaris G' or K or X
> (standing for gnome, kde, xfce.. GKX are just suggestions, use
> giraffe, kite, Xenu, Gnome, KDE, XFCE, or whatever)
> - Indiana goes on to become Opensolaris G
> - i. Define a set of core requirements that allows a distro to be
> called Opensolaris <Word>.

[This seems very similar to what is on the wiki, though it goes into more
detail about what might need to be in the core.  Please consider trying
to add your perspective to what is already there, if you can without doing
too much violence to the perspectives already there.  If not, feel free to
suggest specific canges here and I will work with you... ]

http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/Trademark_usage_and_Branding_guideline



If one is going to have a system where 3rd party binaries can be installed
and expected to "just run", that system needs to have a suitable set of stuff
preinstalled - and for GNOME-ish GUI apps, this means libX11 and GTK+.  If
the GUI app uses more of the GNOME plumbing, however, the slippery slope gets
worse, and you may need bonobo, hal etc.  (The same could be said about KDE
apps with QT and friends...)

In order to have a OpenSolarisKDE system that lets me run that GNOME-ish app,
at some point I may end up needing to have most of GNOME installed in addition
to the KDE stuff.  This implies that all OpenSolaris systems must allow KDE,
GNOME, XFCE, etc to all be co-installed on the same system.

This is driving me to believe (as Joerg says) in a layered definition
that smells something like:

Core := ((((OS/NET + libc) + posix utils) + gnu utils) + X11)*

GNOME Core := Core + (GTK + ...?...)
KDE   Core := Core + (QT + ...?...)

With this in place, the 3rd party app would simply depend on GNOME Core
or KDE Core or ...

If you have an OpenSolaris KDE system, and install this app, you would get
both "most of GNOME" and "the app" installed.

Since /your/ KDE distro was built on Core and used a compatible package,
repository and install toolset, it would pass the compatibility test...

The failure mode here is if the packaging/install mechanisms are
not interchangable between distros, we'd end up with (in your example)
3 incompatible worlds, G, K and X.  This seems undesirable, so Core may
really need to be something like:

Core := (((((OS/NET + libc) + IPS) + posix utils) + gnu utils) + X11)

    -John
____
[*] this is a serving suggestion only.  May contain nuts.



From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Sat Nov  3 17:45:20 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 17:45:20 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
Message-ID: <472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>

[trimmed Cc to be trademark-policy-dev]

Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> "every piece of your distribution built from opensolaris sources should
> be independently reproduceable from source, and changes between the base
> opensolaris sources and the sources used in the build must be clearly
> identified".

Somewhere in here is something that smells a lot like

    "The ARC controls the definition and evolution of 'Core'"

combined with

    "You can't muck with the Core outside of the ARC process
     and still call yourself OpenSolaris"


> If the source changes can be identified, then an expert user can make an
> independant judgement about whether the changes are sufficiently
> compatible for their purposes.

The definition of Core isn't for the expert user, but for the novice
one who isn't able to effectively exercise independent judgement
about this subject.  We aren't talking about Bill Sommerfelds or
even John Plochers here, we are talking about your kid's English
teacher, the bank teller and my daughter's intro to comp-sci class.

> Given the current state of pkg, I think it's premature to require
> everyone use the same packaging system.  What really matters for binary
> compatibility is what the packaging system delivers onto the running
> system.

I was thinking that the app I want needs to be packaged by the ISV
developer, and so my OpenSolaris distro must be able to grok that
format...

   -John


From shivakumar.gn at gmail.com  Sat Nov  3 19:10:42 2007
From: shivakumar.gn at gmail.com (S h i v)
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 07:40:42 +0530
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
	<472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/4/07, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
> [trimmed Cc to be trademark-policy-dev]
>
> Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> > "every piece of your distribution built from opensolaris sources should
> > be independently reproduceable from source, and changes between the base
> > opensolaris sources and the sources used in the build must be clearly
> > identified".
>
> Somewhere in here is something that smells a lot like
>
>     "The ARC controls the definition and evolution of 'Core'"
>
> combined with
>
>     "You can't muck with the Core outside of the ARC process
>      and still call yourself OpenSolaris"
>

Isn't it obvious that ARC is *the* entity qualified to review a
"reference" distro.
Dont tell me you want to define something called a reference using
inputs from advocacy and trademark-policy-dev members.
It is the prerogative of the members here to go to ARC or testing
communities for details relevant to ARC or testing and not they coming
here. To quote a point from an earlier mail of mine.

"The starting point for all these discussions has been branding related
comments such as \"would it benefit the community if Indiana is branded
as The OpenSolaris distro\".
The discussion has taken the flavour that is more relevant to ARC and
testing community than advocacy only subsequently."

Joining to this list was an open call and was about branding & TM
usage guidelines, if there is a change in scope that has happened
during the discussion on the list to encompass ARC related issues,
where relevant, ARC discuss needs to be consulted following the
existing processes. Even if there are individuals from ARC here, it
doesn't become an approval for ARC details.
Or is it that my understanding of the processes is incorrect.

If you believe this is not in the scope of ARC, then ARC is one
another entity whose scope and relevance will be put to test !

>
> > If the source changes can be identified, then an expert user can make an
> > independant judgement about whether the changes are sufficiently
> > compatible for their purposes.
>
> The definition of Core isn't for the expert user, but for the novice
> one who isn't able to effectively exercise independent judgement
> about this subject.  We aren't talking about Bill Sommerfelds or
> even John Plochers here, we are talking about your kid's English
> teacher, the bank teller and my daughter's intro to comp-sci class.
>

Can you please elaborate as to what exactly you mean here. Why and how
do aspects like core, compatibility, reference become layperson and
non-expert issues.
They become that only if a distro itself becomes a reference and any
changes to it remains a reference.
In any case, for a layperson, the distro he holds in the hand and runs
on his computer is all that matters and not something called a core.

regards
Shiv


From webmink at sun.com  Sun Nov  4 03:23:57 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 11:23:57 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
	<472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
	<319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AEFAFE86-1979-4961-9BD4-657F606571BB@sun.com>


On Nov 4, 2007, at 02:10, S h i v wrote:

> Can you please elaborate as to what exactly you mean here. Why and how
> do aspects like core, compatibility, reference become layperson and
> non-expert issues.

See my message[1] on the same subject. It's not for the non-expert to  
define, it is for them to be honoured. Defining the purpose of a core  
is for this list; defining the technical description of that core is  
then a job for a technical discussion elsewhere.

S.

[1] http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007- 
November/000419.html



From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Sun Nov  4 04:32:57 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 04:32:57 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
	<472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
	<319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472DBBF9.4010409@Sun.Com>

S h i v wrote:
> Isn't it obvious that ARC is *the* entity qualified to review a
> "reference" distro.

It should be obvious that /me believes this; the question is whether
or not the extended community also does.  If they don't, then, as you said,
we will have more problems.  I'd rather find that out now rather than later...


> Can you please elaborate as to what exactly you mean here. Why and how
> do aspects like core, compatibility, reference become layperson and
> non-expert issues.
> They become that only if a distro itself becomes a reference and any
> changes to it remains a reference.
> In any case, for a layperson, the distro he holds in the hand and runs
> on his computer is all that matters and not something called a core.


If I (as a layperson) have a dozen distros to choose from, and
I am not an expert, my choice will be effectively random.  I will
pick one, install it, and go on to my real job, which has nothing
to do with OpenSolaris internals.

At some point, I'll want to install and use some add-on product,
package or whatever.

If the only way I can get it is to download sources, compile,
configure and then install, I won't (can't) use it.  The only
way I have access to things is if they are available pre-compiled,
pre-configured and ready to run.

So the questions is, how can I be SURE that some binary package
is intended to be used with the distro I have on my system?

The answer we are driving towards is "The distro says 'OpenSolaris',
and the packages says 'Runs on OpenSolaris'".  (Yes, there is
some discussion about the spelling and pronunciation of those
phrases :-)

   -John



From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM  Sun Nov  4 06:56:29 2007
From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio)
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 23:56:29 +0900
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re:	 Project Indiana and	the OpenSolaris
 name
In-Reply-To: <472A3A28.30604@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <4728A744.8060505@sun.com>
	<18216.45688.712733.597059@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<472931DD.5000605@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
	<5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
	<472A3A28.30604@sun.com>
Message-ID: <472DDD9D.3050002@sun.com>

Derek Cicero wrote:

>As I mentioned at the summit and on the website-discuss list, once this 
>project gets out of the 'preview' phase we'll probably move the 
>OpenSolaris distro to a separate mini-site on os.org and revert the old 
>/os/ home page back.
>
>  
>
I like this idea.

Jim
-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris


From Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM  Sun Nov  4 07:16:39 2007
From: Jim.Grisanzio at Sun.COM (Jim Grisanzio)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:16:39 +0900
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss]
 Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <4729affa.oSRArFoAZU25iVhD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<4728AFB7.8050300@truemail.co.th>
	<4729affa.oSRArFoAZU25iVhD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <472DE257.3080400@sun.com>

Joerg Schilling wrote:

>SchilliX is a project and it still exists and Sun still does not help with SchilliX.....
>
>The main issue is that Sun did miss the time to create a commiunity distribution
>as Sun did not help with SchilliX. The time for createing a real single 
>community distro did pass - it is too late.
>
>  
>

I remember discussions early on that Sun ought not play favorites among 
distros that are initiated outside the company, and I think we've held 
to that. Really, the majority of our time the last four years has been 
spent on opening the OpenSolaris project itself, not on any one project. 
And it's not too late for a new distro, by the way. That's what they 
said about OpenSolaris, remember? And they were all wrong. :)

Jim
-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov  4 07:55:42 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:55:42 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	[advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re: Project Indiana and the
	OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472DDD9D.3050002@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
	<5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
	<472A3A28.30604@sun.com> <472DDD9D.3050002@sun.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711040755m63b43b7bob9d47ee177fad05d@mail.gmail.com>

Derek

Possibly I am misunderstanding. I thought the minisite, was not a
"distro minisite", but was rather a cleaner and simpler homepage to
capture the growing number of non-developers that are being attracted
to the community.

IE: a simpler OpenSolaris homepage. Not a new distro homepage.

At least this is what I had in mind when I initially proposed a new
"user facing" website as a summit topic.

-Brian

On 11/4/07, Jim Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio at sun.com> wrote:
> Derek Cicero wrote:
>
> >As I mentioned at the summit and on the website-discuss list, once this
> >project gets out of the 'preview' phase we'll probably move the
> >OpenSolaris distro to a separate mini-site on os.org and revert the old
> >/os/ home page back.
> >
> >
> >
> I like this idea.
>
> Jim
> --
> http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris
> _______________________________________________
> trademark-policy-dev mailing list
> trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev
>


-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From sriramnrn at gmail.com  Sun Nov  4 05:22:19 2007
From: sriramnrn at gmail.com (Sriram Narayanan)
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 18:52:19 +0530
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] A branding proposal.
In-Reply-To: <148d59250711031036j7e2306adtabb1883a8ccd5000@mail.gmail.com>
References: <148d59250711031036j7e2306adtabb1883a8ccd5000@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49977f270711040522if472be3l14c9e1ea4307cd69@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/3/07, Anil Gulecha <anil.verve at gmail.com> wrote:
<snip/>
> A proposal:
>
> - Change naming from Opensolaris to 'Opensolaris G' or K or X
> (standing for gnome, kde, xfce.. GKX are just suggestions, use
> giraffe, kite, Xenu, Gnome, KDE, XFCE, or whatever)
> - Indiana goes on to become Opensolaris G

Sound like a plan - or at least the skeleton of one :)

> - i. Define a set of core requirements that allows a distro to be
> called Opensolaris <Word>.
> - ii. Define a set of requirements that allow distro to be called
> "based on opensolaris"
> - iii. Define a set of requirements that allow distro to be called
> "compatible with opensolaris"
>  (The requirements for i will be significantly stricter than ii, which
> is higher than iii).
>  (i) can be used by distributions directly aimed at the desktop/server
> community, (ii) and (iii) for DC created distros and appliance/custom
> distros for specific purposes. We'll be setting high expectations for
> (i) as they'll be used by a large audience)

This sounds good too. In the Java space, there are the TCK (Tech
Compliance Kits - I think) and there are reference implementations,
and independent implementations - all of which have to pass the TCK.

> - All of the above will be privileges. A creator can go ahead and name
> his distro anything else if he so chooses.

I'm reminded of "Belenix - innovating on OpenSolaris" :)

-- Sriram


From ndo at unikservice.com  Mon Nov  5 01:00:51 2007
From: ndo at unikservice.com (Nicolas Dorfsman)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 10:00:51 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Suggested name for reference Opensolaris
	distro
In-Reply-To: <26846313.1194123652690.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
References: <26846313.1194123652690.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
Message-ID: <2A64161A-7B78-4FFE-89F0-B5DDDE9B5136@unikservice.com>


Le 3 nov. 07 ? 22:00, MC a ?crit :

>> LibraSolaris
>
> Any proposal that doesn't involve Project Indiana being called  
> "something OpenSolaris something" is a dead end IMHO.  Sun can and  
> will call Indiana OpenSolaris (in case you didn't notice, they  
> already have), so people need to work around that.


-1

Things are moving around these days.

A great name alternative may be a solution.

From Patrick.Finch at Sun.COM  Mon Nov  5 03:15:12 2007
From: Patrick.Finch at Sun.COM (Patrick Finch)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 12:15:12 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Suggested name for reference Opensolaris
 distro
In-Reply-To: <27621809.1194120998935.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
References: <27621809.1194120998935.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1>
Message-ID: <472EFB40.9080404@sun.com>

David C. Stewart wrote:
> [This mail represents my opinion, not my employer?s of course]
> 
> I have read through all of the email copied to opensolaris-discuss.  I applaud the work to get the first Indiana milestone released.  I understand that many in the community feels like their rights were usurped through the use of the name OpenSolaris for this reference distro.
> 
> In the spirit of forward progress, I propose the following:
> 
>> Keep ?OpenSolaris? as the name of the community and the open-source technology
>> Name the reference distro something else.
> 
> Max and I were IM-ing this morning and came up with a suggested name for the reference distro:
> 
> LibraSolaris
> 
> Reasons:
> 
>> It sounds like a geeky misspelling of ?Libre? which is latin for ?free? (as in speech, not beer)
>> Libra is a constellation which is a collection of stars, not just a single ?sun?.
>> The mascot could be the constellation, which are the scales, which suggest justice
>> it kind of trips off the tongue to this English speaker (I can imagine the chants rising up at the next developer summit?)
> 
> Counter arguments ? got a million of course ? 
> 
>> It?s confusing to have a different name than ?OpenSolaris?
>> Oh, I can think of more, but why not love the idea a little

Well, I like the reasoning and it sounds rather elegant.

However, as someone who has done quite a bit of outreach work for 
OpenSolaris, I absolutely think it is confusing to have a name other 
than "OpenSolaris" for a reference distro.

If the reference distro is a success and is truly associated with the 
project, it will be known as "OpenSolaris" anyway, won't it?  At least, 
that is what people will ask for, and unless we create a strong, 
distinct identity for a reference distribution (also potentially 
divisive, and potentially a waste of resources), it will continue to be 
known as "OpenSolaris".

So if the concept of a reference distribution is accepted I just don't 
see the point of making the formal name something different other than 
as a compromise with those who don't accept the concept in the first place.


Or to put it another way, which community do you want new users to join?


Patrick













From sommerfeld at sun.com  Mon Nov  5 11:58:24 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 14:58:24 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com> <47281A56.6020607@Sun.Com>
	<4728a35f.ehlSfUAlBsDt7upr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<b9c544f0710310849r748c79f4w1052234444932e84@mail.gmail.com>
	<4728a861.kljAFgc3FAfMZ+yV%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
	<472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <1194292704.26079.17.camel@thunk>

On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 17:45 -0700, John Plocher wrote:
> Somewhere in here is something that smells a lot like
> 
>     "The ARC controls the definition and evolution of 'Core'"
> 
> combined with
> 
>     "You can't muck with the Core outside of the ARC process
>      and still call yourself OpenSolaris"

No.  ARC review is an important part of the development process, but it
is not the entire development process.

Where I want to go is:

        "bodies chartered by the OGB[1] to oversee the opensolaris
        development process control the evolution of the opensolaris
        core"

and

        "you can't muck with the core outside the opensolaris
        development process and still call yourself opensolaris".
        
There's an important difference.

					- Bill

[1] This hasn't yet happened.




From shivakumar.gn at gmail.com  Mon Nov  5 18:46:44 2007
From: shivakumar.gn at gmail.com (S h i v)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 08:16:44 +0530
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss] [osol-discuss]
	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <AEFAFE86-1979-4961-9BD4-657F606571BB@sun.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
	<472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
	<319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>
	<AEFAFE86-1979-4961-9BD4-657F606571BB@sun.com>
Message-ID: <319ee2b10711051846u76e9d3adsd66a6b460bde2975@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/4/07, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 4, 2007, at 02:10, S h i v wrote:
>
> > Can you please elaborate as to what exactly you mean here. Why and how
> > do aspects like core, compatibility, reference become layperson and
> > non-expert issues.
>
> See my message[1] on the same subject. It's not for the non-expert to
> define, it is for them to be honoured. Defining the purpose of a core
> is for this list; defining the technical description of that core is
> then a job for a technical discussion elsewhere.
>
> S.
>
> [1] http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007- November/000419.html
>

What you refer to is best as a de-facto standard. It is possible for
all the community members to build a repository that makes it
compelling for any OpenSolaris to adhere to practices that will help
them comply with the repository.

Trying to make it de jure when Indiana is too pre-mature and the
discord high will only exacerbate the problems. The push in these
directions that is seen inspite of all these is unfortunate.

I have been playing around with the distro since a couple of days and
am disappointed big-time that people are pushing for this as a
reference prematurely in its development cycle. I wonder if those
pushing for it have even tried both this one and the SX.
- installer & bootup time due to smaller miniroot & liveCD approaches
is what I see as the pluses. Network repository should prove a boon.
- in rest of the areas, where the word compatibility/reference/core matters,

In all other areas it needs the next cycle of development. Way too
many issues currently.
When it comes to technical aspects, people are clear about this being
an alpha release. It needs time mature in technical aspects.
The primary bone of contention, it needs time for non-technical
aspects as well [1].
The root cause needs to be addressed and the all community members
will accept on their own. Forcing the decisions that are happening is
at an expense.

With all the interpretation of the constitution, this is the first
time that I saw the letter of the law become more important than the
spirit. Everyone of us have made all the points that were to be made.
I am waiting for the OGB meeting to materialize.

The success Indiana can achieve will be orders of magnitude higher if
there is procedural justice.

regards
Shiv

[1] http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2007-October/000109.html


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Mon Nov  5 21:00:23 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 21:00:23 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <319ee2b10711051846u76e9d3adsd66a6b460bde2975@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
	<472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
	<319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>
	<AEFAFE86-1979-4961-9BD4-657F606571BB@sun.com>
	<319ee2b10711051846u76e9d3adsd66a6b460bde2975@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <472FF4E7.7010700@Sun.Com>

S h i v wrote:
> When it comes to technical aspects, people are clear about this being
> an alpha release. 

I really hope not.  It's not even *that* baked :-)

Indiana 10/07 (aka OSDPR) is a prototype.  Period.  This means that,
hopefully, some of the more successful of its new "features" and
behaviors will find a place in a "real release" as things that have
been more formally designed and architected.

Because of this, compared to SX, there is really nothing in Indiana
that /could/ be used as a compatibility reference/core, though there
is hope (and not some little intent) that this will change in the future.

   -John



From webmink at sun.com  Tue Nov  6 02:29:16 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 10:29:16 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [advocacy-discuss]
 [osol-discuss]	Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
In-Reply-To: <319ee2b10711051846u76e9d3adsd66a6b460bde2975@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0710311200500.12784@m5.radscan.com>
	<4729b481.2mYbONNEv8WeUlI2%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0711011606340.25579@m5.radscan.com>
	<472b1171.YN32TAWRjmnc/o9f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472B7D31.5070303@Sun.Com> <1194093367.3126.21.camel@localhost>
	<472D1620.8020405@Sun.Com>
	<319ee2b10711031910y787999d5jb62cd7ee237b4a53@mail.gmail.com>
	<AEFAFE86-1979-4961-9BD4-657F606571BB@sun.com>
	<319ee2b10711051846u76e9d3adsd66a6b460bde2975@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2BD1A8D2-6DA8-43B5-987F-368AAC730A93@sun.com>


On Nov 6, 2007, at 02:46, S h i v wrote:

> On 11/4/07, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 4, 2007, at 02:10, S h i v wrote:
>>
>>> Can you please elaborate as to what exactly you mean here. Why  
>>> and how
>>> do aspects like core, compatibility, reference become layperson and
>>> non-expert issues.
>>
>> See my message[1] on the same subject. It's not for the non-expert to
>> define, it is for them to be honoured. Defining the purpose of a core
>> is for this list; defining the technical description of that core is
>> then a job for a technical discussion elsewhere.
>>
>> S.
>>
>> [1] http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/ 
>> 2007- November/000419.html
>>
>
> What you refer to is best as a de-facto standard. It is possible for
> all the community members to build a repository that makes it
> compelling for any OpenSolaris to adhere to practices that will help
> them comply with the repository.

Whether you call it "de facto" (because given the repository it would  
be crazy to build a distro that expected something different) or "de  
jure" (because we prefer to permit closer association of  
"OpenSolaris" with distros that are designed to work with the  
repository), the principle remains the same. I believe the way to  
make the future of OpenSolaris secure is to do both.

>
> Trying to make it de jure when Indiana is too pre-mature and the
> discord high will only exacerbate the problems. The push in these
> directions that is seen inspite of all these is unfortunate.

My point is independent of (and did not mention) Indiana. This is not  
to say it's not controversial. It's clear in the world of Linux that  
the package mechanism is one of the main differentiators.

S.



From derek.cicero at sun.com  Tue Nov  6 16:53:20 2007
From: derek.cicero at sun.com (Derek Cicero)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:53:20 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [osol-discuss]
 [advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re: Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris
 name
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711040755m63b43b7bob9d47ee177fad05d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4727F93E.6090505@sun.com>
	<2492.72.39.216.186.1193882486.squirrel@mail.blastwave.org>
	<Pine.SOC.4.64.0710312115510.13469@logical.logical-approach.com>
	<4729c83b.rE98csh6z5KthmSa%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A17B3.4000001@Sun.Com>
	<472a1d44.LcSuX4fITB/p9qt4%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<472A2BDE.106@sun.com>
	<5b5090780711011322o18296d77o3444520ed9006b0@mail.gmail.com>
	<472A3A28.30604@sun.com> <472DDD9D.3050002@sun.com>
	<5b5090780711040755m63b43b7bob9d47ee177fad05d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <47310C80.8040107@sun.com>

Brandorr wrote:
> Derek
> 
> Possibly I am misunderstanding. I thought the minisite, was not a
> "distro minisite", but was rather a cleaner and simpler homepage to
> capture the growing number of non-developers that are being attracted
> to the community.
> 
> IE: a simpler OpenSolaris homepage. Not a new distro homepage.

Yes and no. The idea was to make the home page reflect what the majority 
of users want do, which is download the OS and perhaps some 'getting 
started' type documentation. The page would have links to the the 
developer site, blogs and other places of interest but it would be very 
streamlined and focused on downloading, similar to Firefox or Fedora.

Derek


> 
> At least this is what I had in mind when I initially proposed a new
> "user facing" website as a summit topic.
> 
> -Brian
> 
> On 11/4/07, Jim Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio at sun.com> wrote:
>> Derek Cicero wrote:
>>
>>> As I mentioned at the summit and on the website-discuss list, once this
>>> project gets out of the 'preview' phase we'll probably move the
>>> OpenSolaris distro to a separate mini-site on os.org and revert the old
>>> /os/ home page back.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I like this idea.
>>
>> Jim
>> --
>> http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris
>> _______________________________________________
>> trademark-policy-dev mailing list
>> trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Derek Cicero
Program Manager
Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division


From webmink at sun.com  Sun Nov 11 04:54:57 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 12:54:57 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Motion to the Board:
	Proposed Naming Convension
In-Reply-To: <47365D79.7020208@cuddletech.com>
References: <47365D79.7020208@cuddletech.com>
Message-ID: <B426C5B8-7463-466C-A162-2D2C1EBD6B09@sun.com>


On Nov 11, 2007, at 01:40, Ben Rockwood wrote:

> I submit to the Chairman of the OpenSolaris Governing Board a  
> motion to
> be placed on the agenda of the next scheduled meeting of the OGB, the
> following:
>
> To support, as a solution acceptable to the community, with the desire
> of finding a mutually agreeable long term solution to the current  
> issues
> facing the community, the naming proposal set forth by Ben Rockwood in
> the following Open Letter: http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/ 
> entry.php?id=875
>
>
> I ask for the support of the board in this matter and to, without  
> delay,
> move this motion toward a formal vote at the soonest possible  
> opportunity.
>
>
> Thank you for your earnest consideration.
>
>  Ben Rockwood

That's a very interesting suggestion. However, I'd suggest it would  
be better to discuss it on the trademark-policy-dev list than  
unilaterally propose it as a board motion. That the place we've all  
set up for this sort of discussion.

S.



From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 13:27:03 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:27:03 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Motion to the Board:
	Proposed Naming Convension
In-Reply-To: <47376C70.4040400@cuddletech.com>
References: <47365D79.7020208@cuddletech.com>
	<B426C5B8-7463-466C-A162-2D2C1EBD6B09@sun.com>
	<47376C70.4040400@cuddletech.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711111327i100ffd54gcd1e7ed8e13355a6@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 11, 2007 3:56 PM, Ben Rockwood <benr at cuddletech.com> wrote:
> Simon Phipps wrote:
> >
> > On Nov 11, 2007, at 01:40, Ben Rockwood wrote:
> >
> >> I submit to the Chairman of the OpenSolaris Governing Board a motion to
> >> be placed on the agenda of the next scheduled meeting of the OGB, the
> >> following:
> >>
> >> To support, as a solution acceptable to the community, with the desire
> >> of finding a mutually agreeable long term solution to the current issues
> >> facing the community, the naming proposal set forth by Ben Rockwood in
> >> the following Open Letter:
> >> http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=875
> >>
> >>
> >> I ask for the support of the board in this matter and to, without delay,
> >> move this motion toward a formal vote at the soonest possible
> >> opportunity.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thank you for your earnest consideration.
> >>
> >>  Ben Rockwood
> >
> > That's a very interesting suggestion. However, I'd suggest it would be
> > better to discuss it on the trademark-policy-dev list than
> > unilaterally propose it as a board motion. That the place we've all
> > set up for this sort of discussion.
>  We're talked... and talked.... and talked.  The results haven't been
> forthcoming.  It's time for action before the situation further degrades.

Actually, we stopped talking when the naming "announcement" came out,
as everyone involved was a bit distracted. Since Mr Franklin's (Sun's)
acknowledgment of the community's concerns on Friday, I think it is
time that we got back to that discussion. At this point, we can write
20 different detailed proposals for the OGB, but I think the idea is
to get a community proposal going, vs. "Brian Gupta's", "Ian
Murdock's" or "Ben Rockwood's". John P. has been doing a good job
trying to incorporate desperate viewpoints in his policy document.

I am ready to continue this discussion on
trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org. I hope that we can now move
forward towards a coherent naming policy. (Let's try and start where
we can find agreement... I think there is some agreement, that there
needs to be a policy in place.

-Brian

-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From benr at cuddletech.com  Sun Nov 11 14:44:23 2007
From: benr at cuddletech.com (Ben Rockwood)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 14:44:23 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Motion to the Board:
	Proposed Naming Convension
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711111327i100ffd54gcd1e7ed8e13355a6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <47365D79.7020208@cuddletech.com>	
	<B426C5B8-7463-466C-A162-2D2C1EBD6B09@sun.com>	
	<47376C70.4040400@cuddletech.com>
	<5b5090780711111327i100ffd54gcd1e7ed8e13355a6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473785C7.3050604@cuddletech.com>

Brandorr wrote:
> On Nov 11, 2007 3:56 PM, Ben Rockwood <benr at cuddletech.com> wrote:
>   
>> Simon Phipps wrote:
>>     
>>> On Nov 11, 2007, at 01:40, Ben Rockwood wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> I submit to the Chairman of the OpenSolaris Governing Board a motion to
>>>> be placed on the agenda of the next scheduled meeting of the OGB, the
>>>> following:
>>>>
>>>> To support, as a solution acceptable to the community, with the desire
>>>> of finding a mutually agreeable long term solution to the current issues
>>>> facing the community, the naming proposal set forth by Ben Rockwood in
>>>> the following Open Letter:
>>>> http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=875
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I ask for the support of the board in this matter and to, without delay,
>>>> move this motion toward a formal vote at the soonest possible
>>>> opportunity.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your earnest consideration.
>>>>
>>>>  Ben Rockwood
>>>>         
>>> That's a very interesting suggestion. However, I'd suggest it would be
>>> better to discuss it on the trademark-policy-dev list than
>>> unilaterally propose it as a board motion. That the place we've all
>>> set up for this sort of discussion.
>>>       
>>  We're talked... and talked.... and talked.  The results haven't been
>> forthcoming.  It's time for action before the situation further degrades.
>>     
>
> Actually, we stopped talking when the naming "announcement" came out,
> as everyone involved was a bit distracted. Since Mr Franklin's (Sun's)
> acknowledgment of the community's concerns on Friday, I think it is
> time that we got back to that discussion. At this point, we can write
> 20 different detailed proposals for the OGB, but I think the idea is
> to get a community proposal going, vs. "Brian Gupta's", "Ian
> Murdock's" or "Ben Rockwood's". John P. has been doing a good job
> trying to incorporate desperate viewpoints in his policy document.
>
> I am ready to continue this discussion on
> trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org. I hope that we can now move
> forward towards a coherent naming policy. (Let's try and start where
> we can find agreement... I think there is some agreement, that there
> needs to be a policy in place.
>   

We must be very clear, we have no control over the trademark.  We simply 
have the ability to provide guidelines to Sun, to be blunt: "Here's how 
you don't piss us off."

The situation we find ourselves in requires more than this.  Sun 
believes it has found the solution and is pushing forward with it.  
Thus, the key is to immediately provide alternative naming 
recommendations and change opinion within Sun, regain our equilibrium, 
and then to backfill our trademark guidelines after the fact.

This isn't about Ian, Ben, Brian, John or anyone... it's about the 
community and our future success, together.

I fully intend to push my proposal for a formal vote by the OGB as soon 
as possible; if there are alternative proposals I suggest gathering them 
and pushing them toward the board and Sun as quickly as possible.

benr.


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 15:42:03 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:42:03 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Where do we stand with the policy draft?
Message-ID: <5b5090780711111542s116c0e46i4e21a5d1058962b0@mail.gmail.com>

John,

I think, now that Sun has volunteered to remove certain text from the
OpenSolaris.org homepage, we can probably continue this trademark and
naming discussion without distraction, while the OGB finishes working
things out with Sun.

Understanding that Sun wishes to use their trademark to promote their
upcoming distro, I would like to withdraw my stance to disallow *ANY*
use of the OpenSolaris trademark as part of a distro name. (If someone
else feels this is important, please speak up, and explain.)

Thinking outloud; one possible way for Sun to use their OpenSolaris
trademark, without potential confusion with the existing community,
would be to deploy a distro specific site at OpenSolaris.com, rather
than OpenSolaris.org.  This would allow Sun and the existing community
to each develop and manage their own content. (This input should be
considered in the website content discussion that is beginning.)

Project Indiana might be known as OSCaR (OpenSolaris Community
Release). I would view this name as meaning, "OpenSolaris released to
the community, for adoption". This would replace Sun's current "Sexy"
(SXCE) releases.

I would avoid calling anything the "reference" at this point in time,
as I don't think Indiana is yet complete enough to be a reference
distro, nor do I feel is the existing community ready to embrace a
reference distro. (Just an observation)..

Thanks,
Brian

-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 15:58:58 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:58:58 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Where do we stand with the policy draft?
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711111542s116c0e46i4e21a5d1058962b0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111542s116c0e46i4e21a5d1058962b0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711111558l178dbfd4q65a8ed815523c371@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> I think, now that Sun has volunteered to remove certain text from the
> OpenSolaris.org homepage, we can probably continue this trademark and
> naming discussion without distraction, while the OGB finishes working
> things out with Sun.

It should be noted that Sun has already done so.

> I would avoid calling anything the "reference" at this point in time,
> as I don't think Indiana is yet complete enough to be a reference
> distro, nor do I feel is the existing community ready to embrace a
> reference distro. (Just an observation)..

Ben Rockwood made a good point earlier though. SXCE/SXDE are already
the "official reference distributions" by which others are judged.
Since Indiana is apparently going to replace SXCE, it becomes the
reference distribution by default.

Seen that way; we've always had a reference distribution. However, now
we happen to have one that is completely re-distributable and likely
represents the shape of things to come in some aspects.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 17:38:52 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 20:38:52 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris core"
Message-ID: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>

"This common software contains the minimum system software required to
boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
host."

 (Some of you may notice that I borrowed and liberally modified some
of the wording from a Sun document)

-Brian

-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From benr at cuddletech.com  Sun Nov 11 12:56:16 2007
From: benr at cuddletech.com (Ben Rockwood)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 12:56:16 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Motion to the Board:
	Proposed Naming Convension
In-Reply-To: <B426C5B8-7463-466C-A162-2D2C1EBD6B09@sun.com>
References: <47365D79.7020208@cuddletech.com>
	<B426C5B8-7463-466C-A162-2D2C1EBD6B09@sun.com>
Message-ID: <47376C70.4040400@cuddletech.com>

Simon Phipps wrote:
>
> On Nov 11, 2007, at 01:40, Ben Rockwood wrote:
>
>> I submit to the Chairman of the OpenSolaris Governing Board a motion to
>> be placed on the agenda of the next scheduled meeting of the OGB, the
>> following:
>>
>> To support, as a solution acceptable to the community, with the desire
>> of finding a mutually agreeable long term solution to the current issues
>> facing the community, the naming proposal set forth by Ben Rockwood in
>> the following Open Letter: 
>> http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=875
>>
>>
>> I ask for the support of the board in this matter and to, without delay,
>> move this motion toward a formal vote at the soonest possible 
>> opportunity.
>>
>>
>> Thank you for your earnest consideration.
>>
>>  Ben Rockwood
>
> That's a very interesting suggestion. However, I'd suggest it would be 
> better to discuss it on the trademark-policy-dev list than 
> unilaterally propose it as a board motion. That the place we've all 
> set up for this sort of discussion.
 We're talked... and talked.... and talked.  The results haven't been 
forthcoming.  It's time for action before the situation further degrades.

benr.


From dougs at truemail.co.th  Sun Nov 11 17:57:24 2007
From: dougs at truemail.co.th (Doug Scott)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:57:24 +0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
 core"
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4737B304.7080809@truemail.co.th>

Brandorr wrote:
> "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> host."
>   
Why non-networked? There are not too many systems/devices nowdays that 
are not networked in some way.

I think the Sun document you got the wording from is from a bygone era.

Doug


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 18:22:58 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:22:58 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <4737B304.7080809@truemail.co.th>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4737B304.7080809@truemail.co.th>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711111822p3398269fw9052e8b998308d8f@mail.gmail.com>

To make it clear that the core must fully support booting off of a
local disk. (IE: no Network Boot dependencies). Another reason, is
that once you add networking you have to contend with 100s of drivers,
which is counter to "core".

-Brian

On Nov 11, 2007 8:57 PM, Doug Scott <dougs at truemail.co.th> wrote:
> Brandorr wrote:
> > "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> > boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> > host."
> >
> Why non-networked? There are not too many systems/devices nowdays that
> are not networked in some way.
>
> I think the Sun document you got the wording from is from a bygone era.
>
> Doug
>



-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From dougs at truemail.co.th  Sun Nov 11 18:37:26 2007
From: dougs at truemail.co.th (Doug Scott)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:37:26 +0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
 core"
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711111822p3398269fw9052e8b998308d8f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>	
	<4737B304.7080809@truemail.co.th>
	<5b5090780711111822p3398269fw9052e8b998308d8f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4737BC66.6050206@truemail.co.th>

Brandorr wrote:
> To make it clear that the core must fully support booting off of a
> local disk. (IE: no Network Boot dependencies). Another reason, is
> that once you add networking you have to contend with 100s of drivers,
> which is counter to "core".
>   
Is there really need for a local disk. If you are really wanting core 
then booting from memory or a pre-booted memory image is the minimum. I 
really do not see much difference these days between an ide controller 
and a network controller. Just the ide controller is much more limited.

Doug


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 19:18:44 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:18:44 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711111918g74b6d2b1m1cc773590004ac4f@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> host."
>
>  (Some of you may notice that I borrowed and liberally modified some
> of the wording from a Sun document)

Given the ubiquity of network hardware today; I believe most folks
would expect even a minimal core to have networking support.

I certainly would.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 21:00:23 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:00:23 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711111918g74b6d2b1m1cc773590004ac4f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0711111918g74b6d2b1m1cc773590004ac4f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711112100s63a951d3x657ce9c19fbe8040@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 11, 2007 10:18 PM, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> > boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> > host."
> >
> >  (Some of you may notice that I borrowed and liberally modified some
> > of the wording from a Sun document)
>
> Given the ubiquity of network hardware today; I believe most folks
> would expect even a minimal core to have networking support.

To be clear the phraseology for networking came directly from a
Solaris10/11 packaging document describing the clusters. I happen to
feel that the layered clustering describes (Open)Solaris well.

Hence:
? Core System Support (SUNWCreq)
This cluster contains the minimum system software required to boot and
run Solaris 2.x on a
stand-alone, non-networked workstation.
? End User System Support (SUNWCuser)
This cluster contains the recommended software necessary for an
end-user to run Solaris 2.x.
It includes the Solaris 2.x operating environment desktop GUI. Please
note that this cluster is
normally very constrained in what can and cannot be added to it
because it is the cluster used
for providing an upgradable Solaris 2.x operating environment.
? Developer System Support (SUNWCprog)
This cluster contains the software components necessary to develop
software on Solaris 2.x
systems. Note that compilers and debuggers are not included with the
Solaris 2.x bundled
software, and must be installed separately.
? Entire Distribution (SUNWCall)
This cluster contains the entire Solaris 2.x bundled release on the
distribution media, including
Answerbook, optional frame buffer and graphics accelerator device
drivers, desktop GUI
demos and optional fonts, etc. See Solaris Clusters and Packages in
[2], and the clustertoc(4)
manpage.
? Entire Distribution plus OEM Support (SUNWCXall)
This cluster contains the entire Solaris 2.x bundled release on the
distribution media, including
additional OEM hardware-specific software like platform-specific
kernels and loadable
modules. This metacluster is usually installed on servers in osoftware
for various machine classes and platforms.

>
> I certainly would.
>
>
> Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
> http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
>
> "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
> junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
> are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall
>



-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 21:02:58 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 23:02:58 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711112100s63a951d3x657ce9c19fbe8040@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0711111918g74b6d2b1m1cc773590004ac4f@mail.gmail.com>
	<5b5090780711112100s63a951d3x657ce9c19fbe8040@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711112102t18a91f37p282fa3ccc40fadb8@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> On Nov 11, 2007 10:18 PM, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > > "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> > > boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> > > host."
> > >
> > >  (Some of you may notice that I borrowed and liberally modified some
> > > of the wording from a Sun document)
> >
> > Given the ubiquity of network hardware today; I believe most folks
> > would expect even a minimal core to have networking support.
>
> To be clear the phraseology for networking came directly from a
> Solaris10/11 packaging document describing the clusters. I happen to
> feel that the layered clustering describes (Open)Solaris well.

The key difference I think is that that cluster reflects what is
installed as opposed to the capabilities of an Install CD :)

Many individuals would expect an install cd to have networking
capability since installation has a good chance of needing a network
connection (think flashinstall, etc.).

Thus, one of the key difficulties I see facing such a core
distribution is that what people expect from the capabilities of an
installed core system may be different than that of the install media
itself.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Sun Nov 11 22:22:25 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:22:25 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <b9c544f0711112102t18a91f37p282fa3ccc40fadb8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0711111918g74b6d2b1m1cc773590004ac4f@mail.gmail.com>
	<5b5090780711112100s63a951d3x657ce9c19fbe8040@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0711112102t18a91f37p282fa3ccc40fadb8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711112222v64b5babcub84829b419441742@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 12, 2007 12:02 AM, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > On Nov 11, 2007 10:18 PM, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > > On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > > > "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> > > > boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> > > > host."
> > > >
> > > >  (Some of you may notice that I borrowed and liberally modified some
> > > > of the wording from a Sun document)
> > >
> > > Given the ubiquity of network hardware today; I believe most folks
> > > would expect even a minimal core to have networking support.
> >
> > To be clear the phraseology for networking came directly from a
> > Solaris10/11 packaging document describing the clusters. I happen to
> > feel that the layered clustering describes (Open)Solaris well.
>
> The key difference I think is that that cluster reflects what is
> installed as opposed to the capabilities of an Install CD :)

Shawn, where do I mention an install CD? I am just proposing a
definition for "OpenSolaris Core". (Also, in case your mind is jumping
in this direction, I am not referring to Indiana when I define core).

Is anyone aware of any potential planned uses for the word core,
beyond it's existing Solaris technical definition? (eg: Possibly a
marketing phrase).

> Many individuals would expect an install cd to have networking
> capability since installation has a good chance of needing a network
> connection (think flashinstall, etc.).
>
> Thus, one of the key difficulties I see facing such a core
> distribution is that what people expect from the capabilities of an
> installed core system may be different than that of the install media
> itself.
>
> --
>
> Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
> http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
>
> "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
> junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
> are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall
>



-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Mon Nov 12 06:42:15 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:42:15 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711112222v64b5babcub84829b419441742@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0711111918g74b6d2b1m1cc773590004ac4f@mail.gmail.com>
	<5b5090780711112100s63a951d3x657ce9c19fbe8040@mail.gmail.com>
	<b9c544f0711112102t18a91f37p282fa3ccc40fadb8@mail.gmail.com>
	<5b5090780711112222v64b5babcub84829b419441742@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711120642q4245610fn328211056f0697ef@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 12:02 AM, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > > On Nov 11, 2007 10:18 PM, Shawn Walker <swalker at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > > > On 11/11/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > > > > "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> > > > > boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> > > > > host."
> > > > >
> > > > >  (Some of you may notice that I borrowed and liberally modified some
> > > > > of the wording from a Sun document)
> > > >
> > > > Given the ubiquity of network hardware today; I believe most folks
> > > > would expect even a minimal core to have networking support.
> > >
> > > To be clear the phraseology for networking came directly from a
> > > Solaris10/11 packaging document describing the clusters. I happen to
> > > feel that the layered clustering describes (Open)Solaris well.
> >
> > The key difference I think is that that cluster reflects what is
> > installed as opposed to the capabilities of an Install CD :)
>
> Shawn, where do I mention an install CD? I am just proposing a
> definition for "OpenSolaris Core". (Also, in case your mind is jumping
> in this direction, I am not referring to Indiana when I define core).

You don't of course; but I think the comment still applies.

> Is anyone aware of any potential planned uses for the word core,
> beyond it's existing Solaris technical definition? (eg: Possibly a
> marketing phrase).

I think that it inherently will end up having marketing tied to it; I
also think that a core reference platform without networking is not
terribly useful. Networking is such a basic piece of functionality
anymore that even our phones and our grandmother's computers use it
(hi grandma!).

I think my main point was that it is important when defining a
reference platform to ensure that those involved realise that the
requirements of a reference platform may not necessarily match those
of the media that delivers it based on your proposed definitions.

However with that said, I would strongly discourage creating a
reference platform that needs more components than it contains to
install itself :)

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Mon Nov 12 10:04:27 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:04:27 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
 core"
In-Reply-To: <4737BC66.6050206@truemail.co.th>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4737B304.7080809@truemail.co.th>
	<5b5090780711111822p3398269fw9052e8b998308d8f@mail.gmail.com>
	<4737BC66.6050206@truemail.co.th>
Message-ID: <473895AB.7070307@Sun.Com>

Doug Scott wrote:
> Brandorr wrote:
>> To make it clear that the core must

> Is there really need for a local disk. If you are really wanting core 


I think we are getting confused about what "core" means.

While it may be interesting from a platform qualification or appliance
bring-up perspective, Brian's definition of "core := absolute minimum
to boot a system" is NOT (IMHO) what we are talking about.  Maybe we need
to use a different word than "core" to refer to this. Unfortunately,
"End User System Support (SUNWCuser)" is a mouthful, and it may imply
more than is needed (because SUNWCuser is not definitive; rather it is
simply a kitchen sink collection...)

Instead, this "core" is what Ben talks about - the set of stuff that
must be there in order to run ISV applications, install and run FOSS
stuff from repositories, and provide interoperability between all the
various systems that carry the OpenSolaris branding.

The definition we are looking for is the one associated with:

	In order to be branded as OpenSolaris Compatible,
	a distro must demonstrate compatibility with a
	predefined set of "core" functionality.

That definition is a lot closer to the contents of SX than it is to
the ON/Install miniroot, though with a network repository in the
picture, Shawn's comment that "a reference platform [should not need]
more components than it contains to install itself" sounds right.

   -John




From peter.tribble at gmail.com  Mon Nov 12 11:08:19 2007
From: peter.tribble at gmail.com (Peter Tribble)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:08:19 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 12, 2007 1:38 AM, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> host."

What does this have to do with the trademark?

Besides, my definition of core would refer to the interfaces and APIs
made available by the system, as that's what software needs to know
about. And for "core" I would interpret as "being universally available",
which might actually be very limited indeed.

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/


From brandorr at opensolaris.org  Mon Nov 12 11:23:53 2007
From: brandorr at opensolaris.org (Brandorr)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:23:53 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Motion to the Board:
	Proposed Naming Convension
In-Reply-To: <473785C7.3050604@cuddletech.com>
References: <47365D79.7020208@cuddletech.com>
	<B426C5B8-7463-466C-A162-2D2C1EBD6B09@sun.com>
	<47376C70.4040400@cuddletech.com>
	<5b5090780711111327i100ffd54gcd1e7ed8e13355a6@mail.gmail.com>
	<473785C7.3050604@cuddletech.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711121123y25bfcb15kf28cb8979c9de2db@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 11, 2007 5:44 PM, Ben Rockwood <benr at cuddletech.com> wrote:
>
> Brandorr wrote:
> > On Nov 11, 2007 3:56 PM, Ben Rockwood <benr at cuddletech.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Simon Phipps wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Nov 11, 2007, at 01:40, Ben Rockwood wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I submit to the Chairman of the OpenSolaris Governing Board a motion to
> >>>> be placed on the agenda of the next scheduled meeting of the OGB, the
> >>>> following:
> >>>>
> >>>> To support, as a solution acceptable to the community, with the desire
> >>>> of finding a mutually agreeable long term solution to the current issues
> >>>> facing the community, the naming proposal set forth by Ben Rockwood in
> >>>> the following Open Letter:
> >>>> http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=875
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I ask for the support of the board in this matter and to, without delay,
> >>>> move this motion toward a formal vote at the soonest possible
> >>>> opportunity.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you for your earnest consideration.
> >>>>
> >>>>  Ben Rockwood
> >>>>
> >>> That's a very interesting suggestion. However, I'd suggest it would be
> >>> better to discuss it on the trademark-policy-dev list than
> >>> unilaterally propose it as a board motion. That the place we've all
> >>> set up for this sort of discussion.
> >>>
> >>  We're talked... and talked.... and talked.  The results haven't been
> >> forthcoming.  It's time for action before the situation further degrades.
> >>
> >
> > Actually, we stopped talking when the naming "announcement" came out,
> > as everyone involved was a bit distracted. Since Mr Franklin's (Sun's)
> > acknowledgment of the community's concerns on Friday, I think it is
> > time that we got back to that discussion. At this point, we can write
> > 20 different detailed proposals for the OGB, but I think the idea is
> > to get a community proposal going, vs. "Brian Gupta's", "Ian
> > Murdock's" or "Ben Rockwood's". John P. has been doing a good job
> > trying to incorporate desperate viewpoints in his policy document.
> >
> > I am ready to continue this discussion on
> > trademark-policy-dev at opensolaris.org. I hope that we can now move
> > forward towards a coherent naming policy. (Let's try and start where
> > we can find agreement... I think there is some agreement, that there
> > needs to be a policy in place.
> >
>
> We must be very clear, we have no control over the trademark.  We simply
> have the ability to provide guidelines to Sun, to be blunt: "Here's how
> you don't piss us off."
>
> The situation we find ourselves in requires more than this.  Sun
> believes it has found the solution and is pushing forward with it.
> Thus, the key is to immediately provide alternative naming
> recommendations and change opinion within Sun, regain our equilibrium,
> and then to backfill our trademark guidelines after the fact.
>
> This isn't about Ian, Ben, Brian, John or anyone... it's about the
> community and our future success, together.
>
> I fully intend to push my proposal for a formal vote by the OGB as soon
> as possible; if there are alternative proposals I suggest gathering them
> and pushing them toward the board and Sun as quickly as possible.
>
> benr.
>

Ben,

You are correct, the community does not have control over the
trademark  This has brought us to where we are today. (I think there
is general agreement that it was a mistake to name the community and
project with a Sun trademark. Hindsight is after all 20/20)

The OGB has approved a project to develop naming and branding
guidelines. There is a discussion in progress. Please feel free to
join the discussion.

Also, I am not sure if you are paying attention, but the OGB and Sun
have begun discussions. I would not dare to presume to speak for Sun,
or Sun's wishes, and unless you have taken over Bill Franklin's role,
I would warn you not to either.  Currently, as I understand, the OGB
is awaiting further input from Sun through Bill, so that the OGB might
possibly address Sun's needs, within the framework of the community
process.

Stating ultimatums to the OGB just risks further distraction from
getting us to a resolution as quickly as possible.

OK, as for an "alternate proposal", I propose that the OGB-approved
trademark and branding project finish it's discussions, and then
present them to the community.

-Brian

P.S. - I think as the need for stronger community leadership is
becoming clear, the OGB is rising to the occasion.

-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Mon Nov 12 11:33:28 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:33:28 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711121133s22ae0248n1fa6a51c46958d34@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/11/2007, Peter Tribble <peter.tribble at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 1:38 AM, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > "This common software contains the minimum system software required to
> > boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
> > host."
>
> What does this have to do with the trademark?

Part of the intent of many individuals here is to use the trademark
with a branding mechanism that defines compatibility. Since the
trademark represents that branding; this has direct, applicable
meaning.

> Besides, my definition of core would refer to the interfaces and APIs
> made available by the system, as that's what software needs to know
> about. And for "core" I would interpret as "being universally available",
> which might actually be very limited indeed.

Right; however, as part of this proposal process we're trying to
determine exactly what the definition of "core," "reference," etc.
means as applied to the proposed usage and branding guidelines.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From brian.gupta at gmail.com  Mon Nov 12 15:17:56 2007
From: brian.gupta at gmail.com (Brian Gupta)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:17:56 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] "OpenSolaris Express", anyone?
Message-ID: <5b5090780711121517p109fa5f8wf1d9d6ae1f60994d@mail.gmail.com>

Does that sound like the name of an OS, or have I spent far to much
time in the Solaris/Sun world?

-Brian

-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From webmink at sun.com  Tue Nov 13 03:44:32 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:44:32 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of
 "OpenSolaris	core"
In-Reply-To: <df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <73106F45-A4E3-4591-BAB7-0229ACE9F4E0@sun.com>


On Nov 12, 2007, at 19:08, Peter Tribble wrote:

> On Nov 12, 2007 1:38 AM, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>> "This common software contains the minimum system software  
>> required to
>> boot and run an OpenSolaris distro on a stand-alone, non-networked
>> host."
>
> What does this have to do with the trademark?

For a trademark to be enforceable, there has to be an objective and  
consistently-applied quality definition associated with it. Hence the  
definition of that quality statement is a key part in defining any  
trademark policy.

S.



From storycrafter at gmail.com  Tue Nov 13 07:29:29 2007
From: storycrafter at gmail.com (Mark Martin)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:29:29 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
	core"
In-Reply-To: <73106F45-A4E3-4591-BAB7-0229ACE9F4E0@sun.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>
	<73106F45-A4E3-4591-BAB7-0229ACE9F4E0@sun.com>
Message-ID: <e40c28290711130729j2ccc1597m435a750809c3f459@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 13, 2007 5:44 AM, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:

> On Nov 12, 2007, at 19:08, Peter Tribble wrote:
>
> > What does this have to do with the trademark?
>
> For a trademark to be enforceable, there has to be an objective and
> consistently-applied quality definition associated with it. Hence the
> definition of that quality statement is a key part in defining any
> trademark policy.
>
> S.
>

John,

This reminds me of something I was going to ask before -- should we invite
or ask for the advice of legal experts to contribute to this discussion or
otherwise advise on the parameters of what can be defined?  My apologies,
Simon, if that's you or if others that have already commented are experts --
I'm a newb (almost) contributor and I haven't met many folks yet.  It just
seems to me that it might be worthwhile to have a well-defined target for
what this policy should look like before it gets vetted by Sun's lawyers.

Mark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071113/dac20796/attachment.html>

From webmink at sun.com  Tue Nov 13 07:54:13 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:54:13 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of
 "OpenSolaris	core"
In-Reply-To: <e40c28290711130729j2ccc1597m435a750809c3f459@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>
	<73106F45-A4E3-4591-BAB7-0229ACE9F4E0@sun.com>
	<e40c28290711130729j2ccc1597m435a750809c3f459@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C31EBCCB-63CD-4713-AA7D-773A0E2CFD81@sun.com>


On Nov 13, 2007, at 15:29, Mark Martin wrote:

> On Nov 13, 2007 5:44 AM, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007, at 19:08, Peter Tribble wrote:
>
> > What does this have to do with the trademark?
>
> For a trademark to be enforceable, there has to be an objective and
> consistently-applied quality definition associated with it. Hence the
> definition of that quality statement is a key part in defining any
> trademark policy.
>
> S.
>
> John,
>
> This reminds me of something I was going to ask before -- should we  
> invite or ask for the advice of legal experts to contribute to this  
> discussion or otherwise advise on the parameters of what can be  
> defined?  My apologies, Simon, if that's you or if others that have  
> already commented are experts -- I'm a newb (almost) contributor  
> and I haven't met many folks yet.  It just seems to me that it  
> might be worthwhile to have a well-defined target for what this  
> policy should look like before it gets vetted by Sun's lawyers.


Lawyers can only express general view, or give advice to clients, so  
there's a limit to how much of that can happen here or anywhere in  
public. There are quite a few of us who have enough exposure to  
trademark law (IANAL - I'm an engineer by training) to know where the  
boundaries are, so feel free to ask questions. I think the current  
draft on the wiki covers most of the ground that's necessary.

S.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071113/f4fe3ab4/attachment.html>

From peter.tribble at gmail.com  Tue Nov 13 10:58:45 2007
From: peter.tribble at gmail.com (Peter Tribble)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:58:45 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] "OpenSolaris Express", anyone?
In-Reply-To: <5b5090780711121517p109fa5f8wf1d9d6ae1f60994d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711121517p109fa5f8wf1d9d6ae1f60994d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <df1347730711131058g41a72b61y2b6c5ef9d63ecdc9@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/12/07, Brian Gupta <brian.gupta at gmail.com> wrote:
> Does that sound like the name of an OS, or have I spent far to much
> time in the Solaris/Sun world?

Sounds wrong to me. The Express in Solaris was to allow
access to upcoming features in Solaris; OpenSolaris is itself
the Express component.

I'm also coming to the conclusion that "OpenSolaris X" is
both confusing to users and divisive for the community,
for all values of X.

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Tue Nov 13 11:44:47 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:44:47 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Proposal for definition of "OpenSolaris
 core"
In-Reply-To: <e40c28290711130729j2ccc1597m435a750809c3f459@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711111738y50310399we5c74c26d22517e1@mail.gmail.com>
	<df1347730711121108ic218b96j698ad19cd11843de@mail.gmail.com>
	<73106F45-A4E3-4591-BAB7-0229ACE9F4E0@sun.com>
	<e40c28290711130729j2ccc1597m435a750809c3f459@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4739FEAF.7020609@Sun.Com>

Mark Martin wrote:
> should we 
> invite or ask for the advice of legal experts to contribute to this 
> discussion or otherwise advise on the parameters of what can be 
> defined? 

We have asked Sun's trademark expert to join this project; Tiki is
traveling on business the next week or so, but should be joining us
here (IIRC) by the end of the month.

   -John




From Patrick.Finch at Sun.COM  Tue Nov 13 12:03:17 2007
From: Patrick.Finch at Sun.COM (Patrick Finch)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:03:17 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] "OpenSolaris Express", anyone?
In-Reply-To: <df1347730711131058g41a72b61y2b6c5ef9d63ecdc9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711121517p109fa5f8wf1d9d6ae1f60994d@mail.gmail.com>
	<df1347730711131058g41a72b61y2b6c5ef9d63ecdc9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473A0305.8040901@sun.com>

Peter Tribble wrote:

> On 11/12/07, Brian Gupta <brian.gupta at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>Does that sound like the name of an OS, or have I spent far to much
>>time in the Solaris/Sun world?
> 
> 
> Sounds wrong to me. The Express in Solaris was to allow
> access to upcoming features in Solaris; OpenSolaris is itself
> the Express component.
> 
> I'm also coming to the conclusion that "OpenSolaris X" is
> both confusing to users and divisive for the community,
> for all values of X.


I tend to agree: it will either confuse, or just not be used.

Patrick



From brian.gupta at gmail.com  Tue Nov 13 12:04:31 2007
From: brian.gupta at gmail.com (Brian Gupta)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:04:31 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] "OpenSolaris Express", anyone?
In-Reply-To: <df1347730711131058g41a72b61y2b6c5ef9d63ecdc9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5b5090780711121517p109fa5f8wf1d9d6ae1f60994d@mail.gmail.com>
	<df1347730711131058g41a72b61y2b6c5ef9d63ecdc9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5b5090780711131204l4d79afa2w9b814ec5a266db92@mail.gmail.com>

Peter,

I agree with your views on OpenSolaris X. (OSX?)

However, I ask this because Indiana is ostensibly replacing SXCE as
Sun's internal development target. (We'll see how this works out). It
has been stated on numerous occasions that Sun greatly desires to call
their new distro "OpenSolaris" (no X).

-Brian

On Nov 13, 2007 1:58 PM, Peter Tribble <peter.tribble at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/12/07, Brian Gupta <brian.gupta at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Does that sound like the name of an OS, or have I spent far to much
> > time in the Solaris/Sun world?
>
> Sounds wrong to me. The Express in Solaris was to allow
> access to upcoming features in Solaris; OpenSolaris is itself
> the Express component.
>
> I'm also coming to the conclusion that "OpenSolaris X" is
> both confusing to users and divisive for the community,
> for all values of X.
>
> --
> -Peter Tribble
> http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
>



-- 
- Brian Gupta

http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Tue Nov 13 13:26:16 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:26:16 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.9999.0711132032360.2088@localhost.localdomain>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<alpine.LFD.0.9999.0711132032360.2088@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <473A1678.3000707@Sun.Com>

[Please redirect this thread to the trademark-policy-dev alias]

Paul Jakma wrote:
> The smallest, useful source subset of OpenSolaris available today would 
> be OS/Net, no? The smallest, useful binary subset would be the reduced 
> networking cluster of ON.
> 
> Is there a good reason to not use those as the initial reference, and 
> incrementally approve on them?

I think that Jim (and a slew of others) touched on it - the reference
definition probably fails miserably as a usefully complete distro.

Consider the world of yesteryear, when the OpenLook GUI desktop
called OpenWindows was being EOL'd in favor of this new thing called
CDE.  We (ARCs...) had to figure out what parts of the desktop
suite were removable and which had to stay; we couldn't remove
anything that a deployed ISV app might be using.

We ended up with a handful of libs that needed to stay, but
the majority of the apps (mailtool, filemgr...), include files
and man pages could go poof.

Back to this discussion, the "libs" are representative of the stuff
a "reference specification" would require, while the other stuff would
make up the special sauce that a worthwhile distro would need to add.

By postulating a network repository where one could go and get missing
dependencies, I think we can get away from requiring that the reference
spec include more than a minimal core.  At least I hope so, since I
don't know how to resolve the "either GNOME or KDE" debate :-)

   -John


From ndo at unikservice.com  Tue Nov 13 13:31:52 2007
From: ndo at unikservice.com (Nicolas Dorfsman)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:31:52 +0100
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Reference distribution birth or launch ?
Message-ID: <70BFB254-1077-4CEB-BB15-6167E1795646@unikservice.com>

	

	Many, many, many time I had to disagree about UNIX hostnames.
	My customer tries to find some "useful" name...you know things like  
"data-x" or other "front-n".
	And each time I explain that it will be an error in the next future  
they would use the same server for many other function, and then the  
hostname would confuse people. It's a UNIX culture based on experience  
of many sysadmins.

	It's the same error for OS name.

	Is there any people here which could say that "Solaris" name was a  
bad choice versus "SunOS" ?

	Do you know any modern company calling their product with their  
company name ?

	It's a good marketting idea to give a name to products...a name is  
associated to a birth.
	"OpenSolaris" birth was 2 years ago.  Indiana is one week old !

	Just try to think to this sexy product names :
		"Apple Phone", "Apple Internet Browser", "Microsoft OS", "Intel CPU  
model 2007", "Sparc multithreaded CPU", "Sony player for walking  
people".

	
	Nicolas




--
Nicolas Dorfsman		T?l: 06.7981.4486
Expert UNIX				Fax: 05.4755.1045
Certifi? Solaris

01010101 01001110 01001001 01011000
| ||\ |||/(` _     . _ _
|_|| \|||\_)(/_|`\/|(_(/_

http://www.unikservice.com
01010101 01001110 01001001 01011000



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071113/0bcb20f9/attachment.html>

From Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM  Tue Nov 13 14:35:56 2007
From: Eric.Boutilier at Sun.COM (Eric Boutilier)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:35:56 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] Requirements for an OpenSolaris
	endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473A1678.3000707@Sun.Com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<alpine.LFD.0.9999.0711132032360.2088@localhost.localdomain>
	<473A1678.3000707@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <473A26CC.10009@sun.com>

John Plocher wrote:
 >
 > Paul Jakma wrote:
 >> The smallest, useful source subset of OpenSolaris available today would
 >> be OS/Net, no? The smallest, useful binary subset would be the reduced
 >> networking cluster of ON.
 >>
 >> Is there a good reason to not use those as the initial reference, and
 >> incrementally approve on them?
 >
 >
 > By postulating a network repository where one could go and get missing
 > dependencies, I think we can get away from requiring that the reference
 > spec include more than a minimal core. At least I hope so, since I
 > don't know how to resolve the "either GNOME or KDE" debate :-)
 >

And as a side benefit, it would create an environment for
smaller instances (appliance, embedded, and other "minimized"
implementations) to flourish in a compatible way. Developers
and enthusiasts in that space would have an architecturally
sound, predictable, and wonderfully convenient starting point.

On a related note, I also like the idea that installation
(Caiman) and packaging (IPS) should be be baked into the spec.
As was pointed out earlier, inclusion/exclusion (drawing lines)
here is tricky business -- too much content can be too
constraining -- but I think it's pretty clear that installation
and packaging should be allowed to "make the cut".

-Eric

[ Redirected to the trademark-policy-dev alias ]




From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Tue Nov 13 18:18:24 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:18:24 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris	endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <ea5e1eee0711131734t49fc148dveebb35326e8a4335@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com> <20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131734t49fc148dveebb35326e8a4335@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473A5AF0.7020200@Sun.Com>

[Please - move this over to trademark-policy-dev!]

Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
> but how do we check they are really compliant? 

 From all the discussions on this topic, I think we have the following
potential options:

A) we invent, build and endorse a comprehensive test suite that
    can be used to validate a baseline, or

B) we simply point at a particular instance and define it to be
    the baseline reference, or

C) we define a set of source code/consolidations to be the baseline, or

D) we define a set of versioned binary packages in a repository to
    be the baseline, or

E) something else that hasn't been discussed yet.

Today, with Solaris and the various derived OpenSolaris distros,
we have a mix of B and C; ISVs have things that run on Solaris,
but it is only because the distros are built using a common OS/Net
source tree (that is vigorously managed by the ARCs) that there
is any hope of compatibility between them.

Going forward, IMHO, A is impractical - it is hard and would take to
much time and effort to do.  B would force us to include components
in the baseline that are unnecessary/inappropriate/unwanted.  C has
issues with /when/ a snapshot is taken, and I don't know anything
about E.

That leaves me with D - and a reliance on IPS and repositories.
Actually, that reliance goes pretty deep - we need to deal with
who can put things into the repository, who gets to modify the
composition and definition of the baseline and how it evolves.

But it gives us a starting point...


   -John

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ignacio_Marambio_Cat=E1n?= <darkjoker at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an OpenSolaris	endorsed/reference
	distro
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:34:23 -0300
Size: 8227
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071113/6b537630/attachment.nws>

From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Tue Nov 13 18:23:23 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:23:23 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris	endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
Message-ID: <473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>

Impedance mismatch alert!


 > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:36:19PM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
 > ... Having the ability for all distributions to pull from
 > the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like the most ideal
 > way to share our work.

and

 > Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
 > A consequence of this approach is that what gets built can't depend on
 > *anything* about the build system, and the tools *must* completely
 > cleanse the environment.

Glynn and I are talking about a BINARY Repository of pre-built packages.

Keith seems to be focused on a SOURCE CODE Repository.

The two are not the same :-)

   -John




From dougs at truemail.co.th  Tue Nov 13 18:42:21 2007
From: dougs at truemail.co.th (Doug Scott)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:42:21 +0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris	endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com>	<473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473A608D.1070107@truemail.co.th>

Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2007 11:23 PM, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
>   
>> Impedance mismatch alert!
>>
>>
>>  > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:36:19PM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
>>  > ... Having the ability for all distributions to pull from
>>  > the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like the most ideal
>>  > way to share our work.
>>
>> and
>>
>>  > Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
>>  > A consequence of this approach is that what gets built can't depend on
>>  > *anything* about the build system, and the tools *must* completely
>>  > cleanse the environment.
>>
>> Glynn and I are talking about a BINARY Repository of pre-built packages.
>>
>> Keith seems to be focused on a SOURCE CODE Repository.
>>
>>     
> a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable
>   
Not at all. The source is still availiable for any distribution which 
want to use another package manager. If another distribution which uses 
a different package manager wants to use this binary repository, then 
all they need to do is to write a package translator into their package 
manager.

Doug


From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM  Tue Nov 13 19:05:42 2007
From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:05:42 +1300
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473A6606.2080901@sun.com>



Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
> a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable

Without wanting to stir things up unnecessarily, would this really be terrible
if this was the case? It feels like unifying at the package management level
provides the best opportunity for people to work together on a known and
potentially well tested set of binary components. I personally believe there's a
massive benefit to that - you leverage each others work to get to a platform
that most people expect, and allows you to do the interesting stuff you want to
do [1].


Glynn

[1] Obviously interesting stuff could include writing a package manager, but I'm
    not convinced you design for those relatively uncommon cases.


From darkjoker at gmail.com  Tue Nov 13 18:28:37 2007
From: darkjoker at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ignacio_Marambio_Cat=E1n?=)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:28:37 -0300
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com> <20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com>
	<473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th> <473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
Message-ID: <ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 13, 2007 11:23 PM, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
> Impedance mismatch alert!
>
>
>  > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:36:19PM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
>  > ... Having the ability for all distributions to pull from
>  > the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like the most ideal
>  > way to share our work.
>
> and
>
>  > Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
>  > A consequence of this approach is that what gets built can't depend on
>  > *anything* about the build system, and the tools *must* completely
>  > cleanse the environment.
>
> Glynn and I are talking about a BINARY Repository of pre-built packages.
>
> Keith seems to be focused on a SOURCE CODE Repository.
>
a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable

nacho


From swalker at opensolaris.org  Tue Nov 13 21:05:16 2007
From: swalker at opensolaris.org (Shawn Walker)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:05:16 -0600
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473A6606.2080901@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com> <20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com>
	<473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th> <473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<473A6606.2080901@sun.com>
Message-ID: <b9c544f0711132105m3007e72ai865aab0a4b1ba8c3@mail.gmail.com>

On 13/11/2007, Glynn Foster <Glynn.Foster at sun.com> wrote:
>
>
> Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
> > a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> > package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable
>
> Without wanting to stir things up unnecessarily, would this really be terrible
> if this was the case? It feels like unifying at the package management level
> provides the best opportunity for people to work together on a known and
> potentially well tested set of binary components. I personally believe there's a
> massive benefit to that - you leverage each others work to get to a platform
> that most people expect, and allows you to do the interesting stuff you want to
> do [1].

I tend to believe that having a common package manager is a
pre-requisite if you want to claim compatibility. What good are
compatible binaries if the base system can't install and manage the
package format the binaries come in? Solutions like "alien" are not
acceptable substitutes. It needs to be transparent to the user.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall


From webmink at sun.com  Wed Nov 14 05:52:17 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:52:17 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris	endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7E7EA46F-0A13-433F-8780-9A3ED0E347F5@sun.com>


On Nov 14, 2007, at 02:28, Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:

> On Nov 13, 2007 11:23 PM, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
>> Impedance mismatch alert!
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:36:19PM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
>>> ... Having the ability for all distributions to pull from
>>> the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like  
>>> the most ideal
>>> way to share our work.
>>
>> and
>>
>>> Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
>>> A consequence of this approach is that what gets built can't  
>>> depend on
>>> *anything* about the build system, and the tools *must* completely
>>> cleanse the environment.
>>
>> Glynn and I are talking about a BINARY Repository of pre-built  
>> packages.
>>
>> Keith seems to be focused on a SOURCE CODE Repository.
>>
> a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable

Please can you explain why, exactly? It seems to me that a common  
pool of installable useful-stuff is a basic necessity for OpenSolaris.

S.



From sommerfeld at sun.com  Wed Nov 14 09:28:23 2007
From: sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:28:23 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for
	an	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473A6606.2080901@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<473A6606.2080901@sun.com>
Message-ID: <1195061303.2258.36.camel@localhost>

On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 16:05 +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
> It feels like unifying at the package management level
> provides the best opportunity for people to work together on a known and
> potentially well tested set of binary components. I personally believe there's a
> massive benefit to that - you leverage each others work to get to a platform
> that most people expect, and allows you to do the interesting stuff you want to
> do [1].

I agree that this would be a good thing in the fullness of time but I
think it's premature at this time to bake a particular packaging system
into policy. 

Certainly IPS/pkg(1m) tool looks like it will become that packaging
system but it's just too new and moving too fast at this point.

					- Bill






From Marty.Duey at Sun.COM  Wed Nov 14 10:13:18 2007
From: Marty.Duey at Sun.COM (Marty Duey)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:13:18 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for
	an	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473B3ABE.5090301@sun.com>

On 11/13/2007 7:28 PM, Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2007 11:23 PM, John Plocher <John.Plocher at sun.com> wrote:
>> Impedance mismatch alert!
>>
>>
>>  > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:36:19PM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
>>  > ... Having the ability for all distributions to pull from
>>  > the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like the most ideal
>>  > way to share our work.
>>
>> and
>>
>>  > Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
>>  > A consequence of this approach is that what gets built can't depend on
>>  > *anything* about the build system, and the tools *must* completely
>>  > cleanse the environment.
>>
>> Glynn and I are talking about a BINARY Repository of pre-built packages.
>>
>> Keith seems to be focused on a SOURCE CODE Repository.
>>
> a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable
> 
> nacho
If a given distribution didn't use the same packaging system would that 
distribution be eliminating the possibility of using the thousands 
(eventually) of packages that will be created for IPS?  And how many 
packaging systems does anyone really think that commercial ISVs and OSS 
communities will support for an OpenSolaris derivative?  I suggest less 
than two.  If Solaris Next will use IPS I think the choice is clear.

Marty


From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Wed Nov 14 10:37:01 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:37:01 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements
	for	an	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473B3ABE.5090301@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<473B3ABE.5090301@sun.com>
Message-ID: <473B404D.5010503@Sun.Com>


Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
> a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable

Marty Duey wrote:
> If a given distribution didn't use the same packaging system would that 
> distribution be eliminating the possibility of using the thousands 
> (eventually) of packages that will be created for IPS? 

Bingo.

The name of the game here is the ability for a user of a distro to
be able to download/install and use arbitrary precompiled programs
targeted at "OpenSolaris".  Those programs will be (my assertion)
pre-packaged with a single packaging system - possibly ips, though
that project has not yet been exposed to the friendly ministrations
of the ARC's peer review :-)

If you don't have a packag manager that understands those packages,
then you won't be OpenSolaris compatible.  Period.  You may still be
built-on-OpenSolaris-code, but your choice to not use the community
standardized packaging structures means you will be an outsider.

If, on the other hand, your package manager understood ips,
blastwave, SysVpkg, debian and redhat, there wouldn't necessarily
be any problem at all.

The question on the table is whether we (OS.o) wish to be simply a
collection of technology as exposed in multiple incompatible
distros, or if we wish to be something 'more' - even if by being
'more' we preclude some things we might have done otherwise.

   -John


From darkjoker at gmail.com  Wed Nov 14 10:53:40 2007
From: darkjoker at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ignacio_Marambio_Cat=E1n?=)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:53:40 -0300
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <7E7EA46F-0A13-433F-8780-9A3ED0E347F5@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com> <20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com>
	<473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th> <473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<7E7EA46F-0A13-433F-8780-9A3ED0E347F5@sun.com>
Message-ID: <ea5e1eee0711141053g6b114efar6d607317b6eef141@mail.gmail.com>

> > a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> > package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable
>
> Please can you explain why, exactly? It seems to me that a common
> pool of installable useful-stuff is a basic necessity for OpenSolaris.
>
> S.
it has to do more with the fact that i think the core of the
distribution should have as little binaries/code as possible while
preserving the ability to boot and reach a shell, that definitely does
not include a package manager (which in the case of IPS would also
mean python and god knows what else).
you can of course stack opensolaris packaging on top of the core like
i explained in another mail though but i feel that we should leave the
choise of packaging to every distribution, specially if we're planning
to use this for branding purposes
notice that i wrote "as little binaries/code" because i'm still
evaluating the posibility that the core should only be a code
repository, it seems like the natural thing to do for an Opensource
project like opensolaris, I'll leave the binary option open, but i
need convincing that it's actually the way to go

nacho


From peter.tribble at gmail.com  Wed Nov 14 11:08:00 2007
From: peter.tribble at gmail.com (Peter Tribble)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:08:00 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473B3ABE.5090301@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com> <20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com>
	<473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th> <473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<473B3ABE.5090301@sun.com>
Message-ID: <df1347730711141108p5388f287v98fee9556e10e2f0@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/14/07, Marty Duey <Marty.Duey at sun.com> wrote:
> On 11/13/2007 7:28 PM, Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
>
> > a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
> > package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable
> >
> > nacho
> If a given distribution didn't use the same packaging system would that
> distribution be eliminating the possibility of using the thousands
> (eventually) of packages that will be created for IPS?  And how many
> packaging systems does anyone really think that commercial ISVs and OSS
> communities will support for an OpenSolaris derivative?  I suggest less
> than two.  If Solaris Next will use IPS I think the choice is clear.

You could take that argument one step further. OpenSolaris (and
Solaris next) should be compatible with Solaris current. Solaris currently
uses SVR4 packaging. How many commercial ISVs are going to
support anything else? Especially as they support back to
Solaris 8 or so.

So if packaging compatibility is a requirement, we should just stop
working on IPS and say that every OpenSolaris distro must use
SVR4 packaging.

While I regard any decision to adopt IPS as premature, I don't think
it's realistic to constrain innovation.

Isn't the whole point of a different distro is that it's different in some way?

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/


From Marty.Duey at Sun.COM  Wed Nov 14 11:13:53 2007
From: Marty.Duey at Sun.COM (Marty Duey)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:13:53 -0700
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <df1347730711141108p5388f287v98fee9556e10e2f0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<473B3ABE.5090301@sun.com>
	<df1347730711141108p5388f287v98fee9556e10e2f0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473B48F1.8070301@sun.com>

On 11/14/2007 12:08 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
> On 11/14/07, Marty Duey <Marty.Duey at sun.com> wrote:
>> On 11/13/2007 7:28 PM, Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
>>
>>> a binary repository would imply that all the distribution agree on a
>>> package manager, that, in my opinion is not acceptable
>>>
>>> nacho
>> If a given distribution didn't use the same packaging system would that
>> distribution be eliminating the possibility of using the thousands
>> (eventually) of packages that will be created for IPS?  And how many
>> packaging systems does anyone really think that commercial ISVs and OSS
>> communities will support for an OpenSolaris derivative?  I suggest less
>> than two.  If Solaris Next will use IPS I think the choice is clear.
> 
> You could take that argument one step further. OpenSolaris (and
> Solaris next) should be compatible with Solaris current. Solaris currently
> uses SVR4 packaging. How many commercial ISVs are going to
> support anything else? Especially as they support back to
> Solaris 8 or so.
> 
> So if packaging compatibility is a requirement, we should just stop
> working on IPS and say that every OpenSolaris distro must use
> SVR4 packaging.
> 
> While I regard any decision to adopt IPS as premature, I don't think
> it's realistic to constrain innovation.
> 
> Isn't the whole point of a different distro is that it's different in some way?
> 

I think the advantages of a improved means for installation and update 
would compel application providers to support a new packaging system. 
Both for their sake and their customers.

As for compatibility with older releases of Solaris, doesn't IPS support 
SVR4 packages?  If so, companies nor communities would have to change 
unless they wanted to do so (and who wouldn't?).

Marty


From peter.tribble at gmail.com  Wed Nov 14 11:22:49 2007
From: peter.tribble at gmail.com (Peter Tribble)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:22:49 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <473B48F1.8070301@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com> <20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com>
	<473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th> <473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<473B3ABE.5090301@sun.com>
	<df1347730711141108p5388f287v98fee9556e10e2f0@mail.gmail.com>
	<473B48F1.8070301@sun.com>
Message-ID: <df1347730711141122m79bdcea7wed8ed6fd7056bb0e@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/14/07, Marty Duey <Marty.Duey at sun.com> wrote:
>
> I think the advantages of a improved means for installation and update
> would compel application providers to support a new packaging system.
> Both for their sake and their customers.

It can be bad enough to persuade some of these companies to
support Solaris at all; adding additional barriers or making them
do extra work is only going to discourage them further.

> As for compatibility with older releases of Solaris, doesn't IPS support
> SVR4 packages?  If so, companies nor communities would have to change
> unless they wanted to do so (and who wouldn't?).

The full nature of that compatibility remains to be seen, although
some of the design goals of IPS are - quite rightly - at odds with
maintaining compatibility.

Fortunately, quite a lot of stuff doesn't use native packaging at
all.

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/


From webmink at sun.com  Wed Nov 14 12:02:01 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:02:01 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <df1347730711141116i174c7446g21671fe51c4301@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<df1347730711141116i174c7446g21671fe51c4301@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <22BB8806-F8DB-44DB-9704-A03526C3E193@sun.com>


On Nov 14, 2007, at 19:16, Peter Tribble wrote:

> On 11/13/07, Glynn Foster <Glynn.Foster at sun.com> wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> Simon Phipps wrote:
>>> Maybe that "reference" is actually the repository, not the code?
>>
>> Absolutely agree on this. Having the ability for all distributions  
>> to pull from
>> the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like the  
>> most ideal
>> way to share our work. I'd very much advocate for this approach,  
>> and certainly
>> where I saw Indiana heading to along with the distro constructor  
>> work.
>
> If everything uses the same binaries, then there's only really one  
> instance.

Well, yes and no.  I regard the choice of package management  
technology as the defining characteristic of families of distro over  
in the world of Linux. In the case of Red Hat, the family has almost  
identical clones, all using RPM. In the case of Ubuntu (itself based  
on Debian), there's great diversity but everyone is using the same  
package management.

So likewise I regard the future package management solution for  
OpenSolaris as a defining characteristic. I believe it's fine for us  
to decide as a goal that we will have a shared system with shared  
repositories, and to predicate the use of "OpenSolaris" as a name on  
that choice (maybe in combination with more predicates, but as few as  
possible IMO). And IPS seems a fine candidate for that system.

S.



From webmink at sun.com  Wed Nov 14 12:04:22 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:04:22 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <ea5e1eee0711141053g6b114efar6d607317b6eef141@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<7E7EA46F-0A13-433F-8780-9A3ED0E347F5@sun.com>
	<ea5e1eee0711141053g6b114efar6d607317b6eef141@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A5550584-3FDC-47FF-9FBB-C635C3F8A204@sun.com>


On Nov 14, 2007, at 18:53, Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:

> you can of course stack opensolaris packaging on top of the core like
> i explained in another mail though but i feel that we should leave the
> choise of packaging to every distribution,


Why would we want to steer into a world with multiple, incompatible  
"distributions" that split the loyalties of package developers?

S.


From Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM  Wed Nov 14 12:25:37 2007
From: Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 09:25:37 +1300
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <A5550584-3FDC-47FF-9FBB-C635C3F8A204@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com> <4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<20071114010240.GA441354@sun.com> <473A562E.40103@truemail.co.th>
	<473A5C1B.9070507@Sun.Com>
	<ea5e1eee0711131828q25f882a3w7b49fc1de06b95d4@mail.gmail.com>
	<7E7EA46F-0A13-433F-8780-9A3ED0E347F5@sun.com>
	<ea5e1eee0711141053g6b114efar6d607317b6eef141@mail.gmail.com>
	<A5550584-3FDC-47FF-9FBB-C635C3F8A204@sun.com>
Message-ID: <473B59C1.4050807@sun.com>



Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Nov 14, 2007, at 18:53, Ignacio Marambio Cat?n wrote:
> 
>> you can of course stack opensolaris packaging on top of the core like
>> i explained in another mail though but i feel that we should leave the
>> choise of packaging to every distribution,
> 
> 
> Why would we want to steer into a world with multiple, incompatible  
> "distributions" that split the loyalties of package developers?

Application availability is one of the fundamental weaknesses of Solaris,
OpenSolaris, BSD, Linux etc. I think Simon's right that the more opportunity for
people to fragment, while it potentially means a lot of innovation happening at
the fringes, I believe it *also* causes duplication of effort, and ultimately
hurts our users.


Glynn


From chris.mahan at gmail.com  Wed Nov 14 16:22:39 2007
From: chris.mahan at gmail.com (Chris Mahan)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:22:39 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <22BB8806-F8DB-44DB-9704-A03526C3E193@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<df1347730711141116i174c7446g21671fe51c4301@mail.gmail.com>
	<22BB8806-F8DB-44DB-9704-A03526C3E193@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4d9b53db0711141622t49298c08lfcdf4491bfc57a31@mail.gmail.com>

On Nov 14, 2007 12:02 PM, Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> wrote:

>
> Well, yes and no.  I regard the choice of package management
> technology as the defining characteristic of families of distro over
> in the world of Linux. In the case of Red Hat, the family has almost
> identical clones, all using RPM. In the case of Ubuntu (itself based
> on Debian), there's great diversity but everyone is using the same
> package management.
>

I think it's important to remember that there is competition in the Linux
package management world. This competition fosters innovation, and there are
many contenders nipping at the heels of the established players. I think
that this is one of the reason why linux-centric package management systems
are much more advanced (for varying definitions of "advanced") than the
current solaris package management. I think it would be a mistake to mandate
a package management system only to watch it stagnate over the coming years
from lack of healthy competition.

Besides, even if it's better than the best of the linux stuff now (which I
doubt could be at first go), I doubt the linux package management systems
will stop competing against each other and exclaim 42! Which would only mean
that in a few years, we'd be right back to where we are now: trailing.

Caveat: I say we because I'm on a OSol list. I'm more Linuxy than Solarisy.


-- 
Chris Mahan
http://www.christophermahan.com/
chris.mahan at gmail.com
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
cell 818.943.1850
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071114/22f448d3/attachment.html>

From webmink at sun.com  Wed Nov 14 16:31:11 2007
From: webmink at sun.com (Simon Phipps)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 00:31:11 +0000
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
 OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <4d9b53db0711141622t49298c08lfcdf4491bfc57a31@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<df1347730711141116i174c7446g21671fe51c4301@mail.gmail.com>
	<22BB8806-F8DB-44DB-9704-A03526C3E193@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0711141622t49298c08lfcdf4491bfc57a31@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F5CC01DC-5D72-4743-8C4F-2A42DF26224E@sun.com>


On Nov 15, 2007, at 00:22, Chris Mahan wrote:

> I think it's important to remember that there is competition in the  
> Linux package management world.

But not within a single distribution/distro family. No-one would  
consider using anything but apt on Debian or Ubuntu and their  
derivatives, and RPM still dominates Red Hat and its clones. Thus I'd  
expect a package manager to be one of the key defining  
characteristics of the OpenSolaris distro family.

S.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071115/16eda48b/attachment.html>

From John.Plocher at Sun.COM  Wed Nov 14 16:33:04 2007
From: John.Plocher at Sun.COM (John Plocher)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:33:04 -0800
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for
	an	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <4d9b53db0711141622t49298c08lfcdf4491bfc57a31@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4738A86E.4060004@sun.com>
	<b9c544f0711121144p59d064faq5a3e998a61ef7c16@mail.gmail.com>
	<47390A28.5080602@Sun.Com>
	<200711131639.lADGdRu1020772@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com>
	<4739F9E7.8080009@Sun.Com>
	<18233.65134.489311.451006@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<C1330F3C-770B-45C8-9071-888975B1664C@sun.com>
	<473A34F3.5010803@sun.com>
	<df1347730711141116i174c7446g21671fe51c4301@mail.gmail.com>
	<22BB8806-F8DB-44DB-9704-A03526C3E193@sun.com>
	<4d9b53db0711141622t49298c08lfcdf4491bfc57a31@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <473B93C0.1050804@Sun.Com>

Chris Mahan wrote:
> I think it would be a mistake to mandate a package management system 
> only to watch it stagnate over the coming years from lack of healthy 
> competition.

 From an ARC perspective, it is important to make a distinction between
the Committed Architectural requirements and the more ephemeral
implementation details.

The SVr4/Solaris pkg structure is Committed, as are the command names,
options and behaviors (pkgadd adds packages...)

The tools themselves, the on-disk meta-info structures and the like are
not.  This is why it is OK for the ips project to contemplate replacing
the whole shebang with a new package management implementation - all it
needs to do is understand Solaris pkgs and provide a set of wrapper
scripts that replace pkgadd, pkgrm and friends.

As packaging state-of-the-art evolves, these tools can too - as long
as they are able to keep on supporting the old, legacy, Committed
architectures.

So, unless you are contemplating a wholesale incompatible flag-day every
time someone gets a bug up their (wherever) and reinvents packaging, the
system is pretty open to innovation...

    -John





From brian.gupta at gmail.com  Wed Nov 14 17:02:24 2007
From: brian.gupta at gmail.com (Brian Gupta)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:02:24 -0500
Subject: [trademark-policy-dev] [ogb-discuss] Requirements for an
	OpenSolaris endorsed/reference distro
In-Reply-To: <F5CC01DC-5D72-4743-8C4F-2A42DF26224E@sun.com>
References: <4738A86E.406