On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Randy Fishel <randy.fishel at sun.com> wrote:
> > +1 (and long overdue) > > I have trivial suggestions, such as the ability to build and package > a single component (this, and others could be discussed within the > community), but the bulk of the proposal seems sound to me. > > ---- Randy > > On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > > Now that Sun has made official moves to de-support certain hardware (and > to be > > fair this is not new ... for example some people have wanted UltraSPARC 1 > > support for a while now, but now it will be expanded to all SPARC > workstations > > other than U25 and U45), it seems like it might be a good idea if we had > a > > "community supported hardware" group and perhaps a dedicated code base. > > > > What I'm thinking of is: > > > > 1) a new consolidation > > > > * call it CSHW (community supported hardware) for now (other names?) > > * (structured somewhat like ON, but probably considerably simpler) > > * containing platform support and drivers not in ON > > * drivers might also include userland components (X11 modules?) > > > > 2) the consolidation would be built "in parallel" to ON > > > > * compile against a checked out copy of the ON source base at the > same > > time. > > * then build 150 of CSHW would also be built against build 150 of ON > > * (and possibly other consolidations such as X?) > > * binary distro would only be "correct" if it made up of matching > > components > > * don't duplicate what is in ON -- this isn't a "fork", its an > extension of > > ON. > > * will probably use a much simpler Makefile system without ON's > limitations > > * I will offer to set up the initial repo for it. > > > > 3) Sun would have no official support for this new consolidation. > > > > * no support in bugster for this stuff > > * not part of any official Sun distro > > * caveat emptor > > > > 4) The "C-Team" for it would be made up of people from the community > > > > * might or might not be Sun employees (have some thoughts here) > > * majority non-Sun kernel contributors > > * would be Core contributors > > * if you want to be on this list, let me know > > * volunteer gatekeeper and backup gatekeeper > > * use OpenSolaris public systems for doing builds > > * builds should not be very resource intensive -- there isn't that > much > > that has to be compiled > > > > 5) Initial things I'd think of integrating into it: > > > > * the Tadpole SPARCLE support I recently yanked from ON > > * restored SDcard functionality for SPARC (by simply compiling the ON > bits) > > * drivers for audiocs4281, and perhaps other less popular audio > hardware > > * perhaps "alternative" drivers for LSI "mfi" and "ce" hardware from > > community authors > > * stp4020 driver (after removal from ON) > > * bpp driver (after removal from ON) > > * other legacy PCMCIA drivers (pcram/pcmem ?!?) > > * platmod support for SPARC workstations as they are removed from ON > > * support for Ultra-1 systems from Rainer > > * perhaps a revived le driver ported from NetBSD? > > * perhaps other "architecture ports" ?? This might be trickier than > you > > think! > > > > 6) Rules for integration would be far, far looser than ON: > > > > * code has to compile > > * you have to assert that you have tested it > > * no long term support commitment required > > * no webrti, instead just an e-mail based review/approval for now > > * (what do other consolidations use for rti approval?) > > * code review still required > > * include documentation (man page) as part of integration > > * no ARC approval required > > * can import ON Consolidation Private interfaces > > * no duplicates of stuff in ON or other consolidations without > > justification > > * sign-off by one of the Core Contributors > > > > 7) Obviously this would require a new Community Group inside OpenSolaris > > > > * three core contributors needed (need to identify two more besides > me) > > * mailing lists and webpages on opensolaris.org > > * code hosted in mercurial on hg.opensolaris.org > > * possibly separate defects.os.o category? not sure. > > > > I'm willing to start the process on this - including setting up an > initial > > consolidation -- if there is enough other community interest. I need at > least > > two other folks who are willing to act as CC's though. My first > nominations > > on this would be Juergen Keil, Rainer Orth, Steve Stallion, and Jason > King. > > Of course, I've not really verified any of this with them yet; I'm happy > to > > take other suggestions or volunteers. > > > > Note that I'm also willing to volunteer as the initial gatekeeper on > this, > > performing builds, etc. > > > > If I hear the necessary support from the community-at-large and receive > > confirmation of willingness to volunteer from appropriate CC's, then I'll > go > > ahead and start the process. > > > > - Garrett > > > > _______________________________________________ > > driver-discuss mailing list > > driver-discuss at opensolaris.org > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/driver-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > on-discuss mailing list > on-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/on-discuss > Nice Garrett! +1 -- Cheers, Steven ----------------------- Steven Acres Toronto OpenSolaris User Group <TOROSUG> Leader http://opensolaris.org/os/project/torosug -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/on-discuss/attachments/20091028/778a11c0/attachment-0001.html>
