On Nov 14, 2007, at 19:16, Peter Tribble wrote: > On 11/13/07, Glynn Foster <Glynn.Foster at sun.com> wrote: >> Hey, >> >> Simon Phipps wrote: >>> Maybe that "reference" is actually the repository, not the code? >> >> Absolutely agree on this. Having the ability for all distributions >> to pull from >> the same repository with a different set of recipes seems like the >> most ideal >> way to share our work. I'd very much advocate for this approach, >> and certainly >> where I saw Indiana heading to along with the distro constructor >> work. > > If everything uses the same binaries, then there's only really one > instance.
Well, yes and no. I regard the choice of package management technology as the defining characteristic of families of distro over in the world of Linux. In the case of Red Hat, the family has almost identical clones, all using RPM. In the case of Ubuntu (itself based on Debian), there's great diversity but everyone is using the same package management. So likewise I regard the future package management solution for OpenSolaris as a defining characteristic. I believe it's fine for us to decide as a goal that we will have a shared system with shared repositories, and to predicate the use of "OpenSolaris" as a name on that choice (maybe in combination with more predicates, but as few as possible IMO). And IPS seems a fine candidate for that system. S.
