On 5/7/07, Brian Gupta <brian.gupta at gmail.com> wrote: > I have attempted to come up with a new document summarizing the > discussion so far. > > OpenSolaris consolidation project (integration) > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Goals > -------- > 1. Common packaging and distribution system
Common across what? Really, what is the scope? Even after reading the whole thread a couple of times I'm unsure whether you're trying to provide something for Solaris/SXCE specifically, a new distribution that doesn't exist yet, or trying to be all things to all distributions. > 2. Common repository and OpenSolaris community. Who would the repository serve? I would expect a repository to serve the users of one particular distribution, so which one? Given that there isn't an OpenSolaris distribution as such at the present time, which distribution do you pick? > 4. Packages need to have a formal policy regarding install locations Why? Why do packages? I would expect distributions to adopt their own policies, so these policies would be distribution-specific. That said, I would expect distributions to be grouped according to which of the several pre-existing standards they chose to be based on (maybe Solaris standard and the LSB-FSH). > 1. Are the Solaris and OpenSolaris goals one and the same? Given that these are completely different entities, it's obvious that they aren't. In the areas of overlap, I would expect them to be similar but not identical. > 2. OpenSolaris is not Solaris, IE: Can OpenSolaris set it's own > standards, that do not necessarily align with Sun's? > 1. For example can the OpenSolaris community choose to remove > Java from OpenSolaris? Last I saw, java wasn't part of OpenSolaris. Solaris includes java, and there are important pieces of software that require java, but whether java is included is up to an individual distribution. > 2. Can OpenSolaris replace JDS with a more generic Gnome I'm not sure this is even a valid question. JDS is the Solaris desktop. Any distribution can use whatever desktop it wishes. (Indeed, I would expect that to be a key distinguishing feature.) > 3. Can we dump the legacy weirdness Define weirdness. Some of this is compatibility. This is for each distribution to decide - any distribution can inflict whatever weirdness it wishes on its users. > 4. Is there a mandate that OpenSolaris must maintain backward > compatibility with Solaris? Yes. Solaris is expected to provide strong compatibility guarantees. As OpenSolaris is the foundation codebase for Solaris, we cannot break compatibility. But whether any distribution is compatible with Solaris, or even with older releases of itself, is up to that distribution. At least by having compatibility in the foundations we can let distributions be compatible if they wish. > 5. Can we change inconsistent paths without leaving symlinks? Again, something for an individual distribution to decide. > 3. Shouldn't we remove all non core stuff from OpenSolaris? There isn't much non-core stuff there anyway. And I got the impression that the aim was to enable the easy supply of much more software. -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
