On 15/11/2007, Stephen Lau <stevel at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> Shawn Walker wrote:
> > On 15/11/2007, Irene (Shi Ying) Huang <Irene.Huang at sun.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 05:43 -0600, Shawn Walker wrote:
> >>
> >>>> I am not sure the processes for Indiana has been decided yet (whether
> >>>> OSR will be required is still unknown). IMO, if you do not put the
> >>>> binaries on Opensolaris download center, but somewhere else, you do not
> >>>> need to worry about the OSRs.
> >>>>
> >>> I think that SQLite could provide real value to developers by being
> >>> integrated as a shared component. This vague resistance to its
> >>> integration seems rather odd to me, given that MySQL and PostgreSQL
> >>> already have been integrated. SQLite compared to both of those is
> >>> positively tiny and is becoming widely-adopted among software
> >>> developers (thanks Mac OS X, etc.).
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Well, this is a resource related problem.
> >>
> >
> > So a project to ensure it works great on OpenSolaris and an ARC
> > integration request by a community member could indeed succeed?
> > Correct?
> >
> >
> That covers the resources involved with just the integration, and IMHO -
> that would be sufficient to get it initially integrated.  The trickier
> part involves making Sun-supported components dependent upon a community
> component.  Sun can't really claim corporate-support (as opposed to
> community support) for a component unless it can support all the
> dependencies up the chain, like they claim to for PostgreSQL.

My main purpose is to see what it takes for integration. If Sun
chooses to support it as a private interface only (meaning not 3rd
parties) in their commercial OS, that is of course their business
decision.

> If SMF is ported to work with a community integrated SQLite, and a
> customer calls with an issue surrounding SMF's use of SQLite, then Sun
> has to have resources on hand to triage, debug, and patch the SQLite issue.

That I understand.

> The current resource constraints surrounding SQLite are that neither ON,
> nor the DB teams have resources to support ongoing maintenance of
> SQLite.  I don't recall if the Desktop group had resources or not - but
> last I recall, the discussion was still ongoing.

Understood.

> Hope that sheds some additional light on what otherwise seems like a
> pretty mundane and easy task.  :)

As long as Sun's decision to support something doesn't stop
integration into OpenSolaris, I can live with that. I would never
expect Sun to support everything that gets integrated.

I just don't want Sun business decisions about support to affect
possible integrations. If I am not mistaken you are saying it can be
integrated, but Sun has their own decisions to make in regards to
support.

Thanks for your response,
-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all
junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics
are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall

Reply via email to