Eric, The document describes problems and/or missing features with each of the projects you have posted. The intent of OPM is that it is a framework to fill the gaps (namely distribution and support of source-build and pre-build packages) for *anyone* who desires to provide third party software, whether that is Sun, Blastwave, SFE, etc. It is a middle ground for all of these projects to meet and define something that benefits the user rather than our individual egos.
FWIW: There is absolutely no reason why pkgbuild would not be used as the build agent and was in fact, the original intent. SFW/CCD has its own separate issues, which Dennis Clarke (and several others) have been quite vocal about - particularly the fact that F/OSS packages are not suited for long term support of a single revision which is the traditional form in Solaris (hence the need for Blastwave et all to build and install their own *duplicate* packages that support newer revisions). If everything was working 'just fine' today, these types (and number of) projects would simply not exist. You do not see competing projects on other OS's (*BSD is an exccelnt example) because there is simply no need - the OS distribution has everything a user needs to support his/her own environment. The community has requested this time and time again. Several implementations exist today. We need to come to a common agreement, and move onto a single system. On 5/10/07, Eric Boutilier <Eric.Boutilier at sun.com> wrote: > On Mon, 7 May 2007, Steven Stallion wrote: > > Everyone, > > > > I have completed the draft proposal for the Open Package Management project > > (previously known as ports). This document details the research and analysis > > that has been done to augment Solaris packaging to provide a more consistent > > feel towards handling third party software. I would like to see this > > document > > used as a basis for the delivery method for this new project. > > > > You can view it here: http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhbvzvv7_0f9prct > > > > Please comment - there is a lot to talk about :) > > Hi Steve, > > My viewpoint (though it probably does not come as much of a surprise) is > that the premise on which the proposal is based (first paragraph of the > introduction) is invalid. I think it's already been obviated by the > achievements and plans of the projects endorsed by the Installation and > Packaging Community Group combined with those of certain opensolaris.org > Freeware Projects (namely SFW/CCD and JDS/SFE/pkgbuild). > > Eric >
