John Plocher writes: > > But that does not exclude "closed source but freely redistributable > > bits". > > > > Acroread? > > nVidia? > > Flashplayer? > > Realplayer? > > > I wouldn't want to make those things part of the "OpenSolaris Reference > Specification", though I would expect that they would all run on any system > that was built with such a spec in mind.
I think you're illustrating the point of confusion nicely, because, based on previous discussions, I suspect rather strongly that those are exactly the sorts of components that many of the reference- distribution proponents are _assuming_ will be included. After all, could we possibly have a "reference distribution" posted on the main web page and intended for first-time users that fails to work right when someone clicks on a realmedia link? I don't see how such a thing would help win OpenSolaris adoption. It seems unthinkable. What we come back to is that a common and minimal "reference distribution," at least as you're describing, isn't what the rest of the proponents (notably Sun's marketing) want to have here. Instead, they want a single "known good" distribution that can be proposed for all first-time users. Ignoring that desire will, I think, set us up for future conflicts of exactly this nature. That's a higher bar (in some senses) and, if there can be only one such distribution, it clearly has an impact on the acceptance and viability of any other distribution. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
