On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Peter Tribble wrote:
On 6/22/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
In theory, by having a reference platform. But that doesn't actually
solve the problem. People can always create incompatible
distributions.
They can. Nothing is ever going to prevent those who want to be
incompatible from being so.
However, the trick is to make it easier to be compatible than not.
And that's where a base distribution that can be used as a foundation
by others will help...
Totally agree. But again it's interesting to hold theory up to a real-world
case like Nexenta. My sense (IOW, I could be wrong) is that they _totally_
have the BFU process down pat. So for Nexenta, it seems the ON consolidation
literally serves as their easy-to-be-compatible-with base. And therefore it
follows that the tack they are on today (with regard to compatibility/incompatibility)
is not at all due to the current lack of an OpenSolaris base distro...?
Still I strongly agree -- it would be hugely beneficial to make it easier
to be compatible, even in the face of this apparent anomoly. (There
apparently will always be projects who prefer the incompatible route --
including ones like Nexenta that are really viable and well-engineered. I
just hope it turns out to be a really small niche.)
Compatibility Junkie,
Eric
- by reusing the bits, you get compatibility for free.
Force people to build completely independent distributions from scratch,
and divergence will happen, because minor differences will start to
creep in.
_______________________________________________
indiana-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
