C. Bergström wrote: > James Cornell wrote: >> Ché Kristo wrote: >> >>> Hi Stephen, >>> >>> A few questions: >>> * Wouldn't there be issues in the circumstance where a user was >>> using 2008.11 and wanted to stay on that release but 2009.04 was >>> released into that repository forcing them to upgrade. Will there be >>> sub repository for each release for those wishing not to track >>> against the most current release for whatever reason? i.e something >>> like http://pkg.opensolaris.org/release/2008.11/ >>> >>> * Will there be a proprietary repository for things things like >>> Flash, acroread, Opera, Fluendo plugins etc? >>> >>> * Any news on http://pkg.opensolaris.org/contrib/? >>> >>> Many thanks - Che >>> >> [big snip] >> James > Hi James.. > > I think OpenSolaris isn't intended for production use yet.. and Sun > *does* have other versions which are fairly similar *and* offering > support contracts. Have you taken the time to contact a support rep? > (Sorry I don't know specifics or work for Sun, but hear it's quite > reasonably priced..) > As Che said in his reply to this thread there's a gray area of what Sun intentions with 2008.11 specifically is. I believe 2008.11 is ready for small scale production use, but I also still believe Sun's pricing is still out of line with the so called intended license, which is really in all honesty developers in general, who normally don't buy into support. Added value such as proprietary component support and post dated support is something Sun has not formally addressed for any of the Indiana spin offs. Their OpenSolaris support has from the beginning and still is chiefly squared at SXCE. I'll keep checking back of course.
James _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
