[trademark-policy-dev] [Fwd: The new and improved OpenSolaris TM guidelines]

[Sara Dornsife]

Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 25/10/2007, Brandorr <brandorr at opensolaris.org> wrote:
>   
>> On 10/25/07, Glynn Foster <Glynn.Foster at sun.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Brandorr wrote:
>>>       
>>>> What happened with the idea of a compatibility testing suite?
>>>>         
>>> The idea is still there. I don't personally like the idea because I believe it
>>> massively complicates things for the typical use case. I'm not really the person
>>> qualified to talk about it though.
>>>       
>> What about Nexenta, Martux(Blastwave) and Shillix?
>>
>> Clearly, they are designed to be "compatible" with Solaris. (Even
>> Nexenta has a Solaris personality mode).
>>     
>
> Right, but trying to be compatible and actually being compatible are
> two different things. The only way without extensive test suite to
> verify compatibility is to ensure that the same components, packaging,
> etc. are used.
>   

And they can still use the OpenSolaris TM, it will just have a 
qualifier. "Built on OpenSolaris". Indicating that uses the technology 
or code, but that it isn't compatible.

>   
>> Excluding these groundbreaking distros from trying for compatibility
>> is a mistake, in my opinion. (I understand it's not an easy problem,
>> but we need to keep the door open).
>>     
>
> They're not being excluded; they just don't meet the compatibility guidelines.
>
> In their documentation, they can point out that they're designed to be
> compatible as possible with OpenSolaris, but they cannot claim
> compatibility. That's all it is to me...
>   

Exactly.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/attachments/20071025/92025f75/attachment.html>