> > The upstream maintainers will need Solaris boxes (SPARC and x86) in > > order to produce Solaris packages. I'm skeptical that they will be > > enthusiastic about this. > > > Humm,,... > > I'm sending this mail from a fairly small box which can boot Solaris, 2 > flavors > of Windows and 8 (and rising) versions of Linux. I don't see x86 > hardware as > much of an issue.
Yeah it can multiboot. But is that really an ideal way of working. Many of the people we are talking about are college students, without a huge amount of disposable income. Generally they don't have a surplus of hardware, and don't know how to admin Solaris. We should not require package maintainers to know how to build a Solaris machine. (Not necessarily because it's difficult, but because it is a deterant that can easily be removed.) We need to make it simple for people to get involved no matter what level of resources they have. > I understand the Sparc issue. Perhaps Sun could do something useful > with the "trade-in" boxes we are getting, or something like that. Maybe, trade in boxes. But I think that LDOMs might be the way to go. (From another thread) > One concept discussed was to have a machine farm under OpenSolaris > auspicies. Probably not as simple as it sounds (to prevent abuse), but > certainly possible. I would say that limiting access to those who have signed contributor agreements would be a good starting point. (With a strict abuse policy.) I would love to hear Dennis' thoughts on abuse, as he runs a public build farm. > I'm not sure what "one" and "two" are here, but I see I misspoke > anyway. I should > have said "Linux users don't have this latency", because my point was to > be that they > didn't need to wait for the distro to do anything. Solaris users don't > have that option. One is the stable version, that ships with Solaris and doesn't get a major bump until the next major OS rev. Two is the most recent "stable" release, for those people who need features. -Brian
