> Darren Reed wrote: > > For option (C), it is possible that the appliances > community could be > > made a project of the "Installation & Packaging" > community, since most > > of the discussion (or activty) by appliance > developers is around that > > topic, but I fear that such a move would drown out > any appliance > > activity in a very active community. > > Whatever you decide to do, I don't think there ought > to be a fear of > being drowned out if you change status. If you become > a Project you'd > still have a space on the new site for your content, > you'd get access to > SCM if you wanted it, and you'd still have your > mailing list (which > seems active). Personally, I think Project status is > a far more > desirable state than being a Community Group. > > Jim
How about making it part of the distributions community? That seems to me more applicable than installation and packaging. From the software perspective, I would think that an appliance is a special-purpose distribution, perhaps targeted toward a specific hardware configuration (maybe less RAM but runs off of flash, and thus with noatime and/or read-only as much as possible; maybe also special drivers, a dedicated web management interface, etc). Packaging may relate insofar as existing package boundaries and contents may not be suitable, but I hardly see that as the focus, even if it gets a certain amount of attention. I also think that while an appliance might typically run on x86 (or on the new ARM port), a port to a new architecture (usually a prominent aspect of the emerging-platforms community someone else suggested as a new home) would usually be beyond the scope of most typical appliance development. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
