Hello there ... John Plocher wrote: > [Lets take this discussion over to the new branding alias: > trademark-policy-dev at openSolaris.org > Feel free to subscribe. > -John] >
John, thanks for inviting me, I just subscribed. First I would like to say, that it isn't something like "whine whine, I feel MartUX comes too short" what has brought me to post to this thread earlier this day. And especially isn't it targeted against any single of the community members (kind regards to everyone, including Sara and Ian!). I just find the whole thing confusing (to myself, and then, what will a new user think, or even Linux biased parts of the press?). I think it can be done better, see John's excellent suggestions below. > Shawn Walker wrote: > >> Unfortunately John, I can't agree with that. >> >> The problem is that users already have the expectation that clicking >> the "Download" button on OpenSolaris.org will let them download >> "OpenSolaris." >> > > But it doesn't /do/ that. Instead, it takes them to a page with half > a dozen distro choices, none of which are branded in any consistent > manner: > > Solaris Express Community Edition is Sun's binary release for > OpenSolaris developers. It is built from the latest OpenSolaris source > and additional technology > Shouldn't that be have been called OpenSolaris Express, from 20050614 on ... ? > Solaris Express Developer Edition is Sun's tested release built > from the OpenSolaris bits and additional technology > Confusing, as the Developer Edition DVD also offers a classic SXCR boot/install option. Worse: The CD's also seem to offer both options at first, only to tell you later, that the CD version doesn't offer the "Developer" thing. Not to mention, that the "Developer" install ships with a version of SUNWspro that is not supported for building ON (has this changed, is it going to?) . Is that "Developer" thing actually available for SPARC? Is anybody calling this consistency? > BeleniX is a *NIX distribution that is built using the OpenSolaris > source base > > marTux is the first non-Solaris Express/Solaris Express Community > Release OpenSolaris distribution > Please: I have changed the spelling to MartUX, four months or so ago. Plus: There is also a x64/x86 version available for 13 months now. Full with 9.2GB (!) of clofi compressed CSW packages. I thought somebody would ever adjust the description. I had written to the general discuss list back then. It is actually the first x86 LiveDVD that had ever been released. Plus the first one (whether CD or DVD) capable of fully booting into a working Xorg on x64 in 64bit mode. I guess nobody except Ken Mays had ever given it a try. No wonder, as most people don't have a SPARC. So they won't open that link exclusively pointing to a "LiveCD for SPARC". Here it was, now completely outdated: http://www.martux.org/RELEASES/x86_and_x64/DVD/ It is the formerly planned mBE (MartUX Blastwave Edition). I have offered Blastwave n times to make something like a CSW community distro out of it. Every single CSW maintainer can find himself in /etc/release! But personal issues prevented that. > NexentaOS is ... built on top of the OpenSolaris kernel and runtime. > NexentaOS integrates OpenSolaris (SunOS kernel) ... > > SchilliX is an OpenSolaris based UNIX Live CD > > In truth, all of these should be branded similarly - they are all based > on OpenSolaris technology, because all of them have chosen to include > different sets of packages. Furthermore, since there is no attempt to > define "OpenSolaris" or claim baseline compatibility, it is misleading > to say that they are either OpenSolaris-based or OpenSolaris-Compatible. > Exactly. I agree in that some compatibility appcert-tool / document / program / project should be set up. To avoid missing lib - conflicts or incompatible lib versions. But basically all existing distros _are_ fully compatible to each other. > I would liketo see this download page eventually list ALL the various > distros, grouped by compatibility claims and sorted by release status > (releases, development in progress, ...): > > OpenSolaris Compatible Distros > ============================== > Indiana - Laptop Distro Prototype (November, 2006) > Indiana - Desktop/Laptop Distro (development in progress, currently at > build 7 out of 16) > ... > > Add-on package repositories > =========================== > ........ > ........ (mirror) > > OpenSolaris Based Distros > ========================= > Solaris Developer Express (based on ON build 70) > Solaris Express (based on ON build 86) > Schillix 0.1.2.3 (based on ON build 86) > Nexenta 4.5.6 (based on ON build 85) > MarTux 0.3 (based on ON build 87) > ... > > Distros using OpenSolaris Technology > ==================================== > PlocherModelTrain Appliance > ... > > > I love that table. Something like this would make most sense to me. Of course strictly monitored, tested and documented. But I get the impression nobody at Sun has ever even tested my own x64/x86 bits from 2006, cannot speak for the other distros. Why not reviewing each new distro release and posting the results? Maybe a contest as potential tool to increase motivation for more involvement, better results? >> Every time there is a new SXDE/SXCE release, and the news gets posted >> to somewhere like OSNews, there are always a handful of comments from >> folks confused by the number of download choices, the differences >> between them, and why they can't download something that's called >> "OpenSolaris." >> > > Maybe we are exposing things at too fine a level - the confusion may > be because we DON'T YET have *a* release of anything - what we *do have* > are snapshots in time of a development process. Nobody has yet put > a stake in the ground and claimed to have a real product release, in > the sense of the ARC Release Taxonomy. > > Think this thru for a moment, factoring in the asynchronous nature of > repositories. What does it mean to release a distro in such an environment? > There is "releasing the recipe", "obtaining the recipe and building a distro > out of it", "installing that distro", and "upgrading a system that has that > distro installed". > > Depending on *when* you do these actions, you will get different bits. > In the beginning when the recipe was created and the first distro > image was constructed, the bits were in a known state. This state > is shared with everyone who downloads and installs that particular > distro image. Those installed images will immediately begin to diverge > >from the original distro bits as soon as the user does a pkg update from a > repository containing newer bits. The same goes for anyone who uses > the same recipe to recreate a distro image at a later date. > > Which of these is worthy of being called "a new release of ___"? > (I don't have an answer...) > > > >> Despite our best efforts over the last few years it has become clear >> that users have made their choice about what they expect. >> > > Best efforts: Please define. > and that would be? > > -John Something like an installable CSW-OpenSolaris? I bet on that. But I guess such an option has never been considered by Sun, I do remember claims about Blastwave's packaging not being "professional enough". No flames please. %martin p.s. I don't speak for any entity except for myself. I'm not affiliated with any organization, including Blastwave.
