Hi All, it is thread about OI , but let me provide additional info.
We are talking about illumos, but I think, we have to understand, that illumos based on sponsors who are using it for business and depend on it. Take a look list of advocates: all advocates from companies who are using illumos for business and invest to devs/env. we try to talk about some integrations/changes in illumos for other projects, but we have no advocates who can integrate our changes if they are not interest for companies with business based on illumos. also - as you can see - all companies/distrs are not using illumos as is - all have forks with additional changes. but - all depend on maintenance of additional changes and wants minimize it by integrate changes to illumos. for my opinion: packaging it is not critical area for illumos and can be using outside based on current IPS manifests. yes - will be better to have integrated DEB packages generation (just for example), but who will maintain it ? yes - i can maintain it, but who will integrate it ? update tools and some other changes ? As i said - we have no additional advocates/integrators who can do it with out of scope of business needs. good example: Xen community and work with tree. source tree has parts with persons who can review it and integrate. Example: if you want commit your changes to 'tools' - you have to add persons in MAINTAINERS list who are familiar with tools and responsible for approval/integration. We have no it with illumos. we have list of advocates. if changes are no interest for companies with illumos business - changes will not integrate to illumos tree and we can only maintain it on personal forks. but with good result: we can update personal tree by illumos changes for personal distr. -- Best regards, Igor Kozhukhov On Feb 19, 2014, at 5:30 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Andy Stormont <andyjstorm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The IPS metadeta isn?t really that useful to non-IPS distributions but I?m >> not sure removing it is a good idea. Instead I?d rather see the SVR4 data >> reintegrated if it?s going to see some use and somebody cares enough to >> maintain it. > > This is what I did in late 2010 and early 2011. > > Svr4 package meta data is present and maintained on SchilliX-ON. > Feel free to take it. > > Even though I have no use for the IPS meta data, I did maintain it so far... > > Jörg > > -- > EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin > j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) > joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: > http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily > > _______________________________________________ > oi-dev mailing list > oi-dev@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev _______________________________________________ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev