On 4/12/06, Keith M. Wesolowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 01:30:17PM -0500, James Dickens wrote: > > > Sounds like it will be impossible to get rolling. /opt/sfw is allready > > owned by CCD group. That group is about as closed as it gets, just > > This is news to me. I wasn't aware that such a 'CCD group' exists at > all. One possibility is that your assertion regarding its closed > nature is even more accurate than I would have imagined, and this > group is so secretive that even I'm unaware of it. Another is that > you're incorrectly assuming that because there has been silence > regarding updates to this content, it must be that the people > responsible for doing so are operating in a closed manner; in reality, > the reason for silence is that no such group exists. > see http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=7545 the community aspects of the community was just a facade. To appear opensolaris friendly...
"3. Initial Structure Solaris management has asked Steve Christensen to be the gate keeper. Steve has maintained the sunfreeware.com site for many years. The source base will be the Companion contents for Solaris 10 minus those packages that are now included in Solaris 11 or those packages considered no longer important. Requests for upgrading existing packages and/or adding new packages will reviewed by a team of Sun engineers. Interested external people will be invited to join this team. The goal is equal representation. The review team will follow all applicable Open Solaris processes. Many implementation details remain to be determined." perhaps you are unaware of the CCD group because it was outsourced. It is also rumored that in offering Steve Christensen the role of gate keeper Sun made payments to him in cash and hardware to him. on another mailing list, the following was posted by eric B. From: Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mailed-By: lists.blastwave.org Reply-To: internal list for the CSW maintainers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: internal list for the CSW maintainers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Apr 12, 2006 11:16 AM Subject: Re: [csw-maintainers] Proposal for Community Software for Solaris My 2 cents: The Companion CD psuedo-consolidation is supposed to come out this month (knock on wood), and I for one have been awaiting that (eagerly). Until its out in the open there's no way for the community to compare, contrast, and hopefully somehow reconcile the overlap that results from having both a CCD co-development system and a Blastwave (pkg-get/CSW) co-development system essentially working toward the same goal. (Not to mention the JDS community's spec-files-extras, which in a limited way is yet a third one having the same goal. See: > > this morning i wrote a response to an email about how CCD and > > Blastwave can co-develop I think its also on topic for this mailing > > list so i'm including it here as well. > > > > The CCD and Blastwave are two projects that aim to do the same thing, > > but in totally different ways. They have totally different > > construction methods, focused on totally different audiences, and > > basically are incompatible. CCD has spent the better part of a year > > working on its current release, totally closed off from the OpenSource > > community. No mention of progress, no public alpha or beta releases. > > Ah, so you are equating the SFW C-team with this mythical 'CCD group.' > In fact, the SFW C-team has been focusing its energies on the SFW > consolidation rather than the CCD. That focus has paid off with a > release of that consolidation to open development. > no the group isn't the C team unless you referring to steven christensen as the C-team. > I can't pretend I'm happy about how long it's taken us to get to this > point. The project proposal is evidence that we are about to start > making the kind of progress you're looking for, and wish to do so in > an open manner. > The proposal was made in August of last year, they are preparing to release an actual product, yet nothing has been open about it other than the announcement. > > No community input as to what packages are included. The source code > > and modifications are supposedly made available sometime after release > > but it certainly isn't out in the open. Made by one person for a > > select crowd that is willing to use one to 2 year old versions simply > > because it was blessed by a team at sun and the "Sun" name is placed > > on it. The CCD project is about as closed as an "open source project" > > can get. CCD is the only distribution that makes Debian stable seem > > fresh and new. > > These are exactly the aspects of CCD development which are to be > corrected by this project. I read a great deal of bitterness in your > assessment of the CCD's status; while it may be justified by past > decisions, the individuals responsible for those decisions are no > longer in control. It would be more constructive for you to recognise > that: > Well if that is true, no announcement was made, but it appears that its an old boy network is still in place because no one without a sun badge is part of it. > (a) a tiny team of volunteers within Sun is working to open the CCD to > the kind of development and community-focused decision-making > processes which have historically been absent, > How long have they been working on "opening" an opensource distribution of software? Not trying to start a license war, but the GPL requires access to the changes made to the programs seems like it should of been open from the beginning and it still isn't today. This isn't a closed source project that has to go through legal and other reviews like the Solaris source, it can be made public by posting the source and scripts on a web site, and throw open the doors, but this is not what happened if this small group is behind the latest CCD release, it basically followed the same old pattern of releasing an updated version, no input from the external community just Sun once again rubber stamping a release created in the back rooms. I don't see any community involvement. > (b) Sun has not had resources allocated to improving the CCD for well > over a year and still does not, > > (c) all of your criticisms would have applied to Solaris itself prior > to the OpenSolaris program, and that this program has already been the > vehicle for major changes of exactly the type you seem to desire. > > > How can CCD and Blastwave co-develop anything? CCD is hidden, and > > Blastwave is public and moving towards being more public, CCD installs > > its libraries in a different location and most likely use different > > arguments and goals in building its distribution. Even 6 months after > > release CCD packages will on average of one or two releases behind. > > Let's consider these concerns one at a time. > > First: "CCD is hidden; Blastwave is public" > > Both parts of this assertion are misleading. I believe I have already > explained that the purpose of the proposed (and now approved) project > is precisely to open the CCD. Blastwave's "source" (essentially the > type of materials released with the SFW consolidation and the type > which will be opened to the world through this project - the scripts, > makefiles, and other infrastructure for turning source tarballs into > SVR4 packages) is entirely hidden even from its users. If, for > example, I wish to alter the build parameters for a certain component > and produce my own packages, there is no way for me to do so. I > recognise that this may be undergoing change as well, so the correct > phrasing here would be closer to: "Historically, both the CCD and > Blastwave were completely closed. Both are currently undergoing > changes to make development more open, centralised, and visible both > to contributors and users." > > Second: "CCD installs its libraries in a different location." > > True. But then, Solaris installs its libraries into yet a third > location. Does this mean those libraries are useless? Of course not. > The real problem I suspect you're trying to describe here is that each > of these stacks contains different and probably incompatible versions > of the same software. Intermixing libraries from the two stacks in > the same address space would likely lead to application failure. This > absolutely is a problem, but it is not directly related to your stated > concern. Indeed, segregating these two stacks is not only not a bug, > it's downright necessary as a workaround for the real bug, which is > that there are two separate stacks in the first place. > > Third: "The CCD software will always be out of date." > > This argument really exposes your desire to attack rather than > cooperate. You have assumed, incorrectly, that the CCD will always be > "a CD shipped with Solaris." Nothing could be more wrong. We have > not committed to delivering any hard media into Nevada or subsequent > releases. The Java-based installer has been removed from the S10U2 > and Nevada companion products, and the integration into the Solaris > installer as a co-bundled option has been removed as well. Instead, > we envision a distribution model much closer to Blastwave's (or to any > number of similar systems with which you may be familiar, such as > Gentoo or the BSD Ports systems). The specific mechanisms and > policies for this distribution model remain to be developed - and will > be openly contemplated under the auspices of this project. Thus, once > this is in place, there will be no reason for this "Companion > Software" to be out of date. Even in the absence of such a > comprehensive network-based distribution scheme, regular biweekly > builds will be run to make packages available, and the source itself > will be available in realtime. Thus components should be out of date > only for one of the following reasons: > Quote: Instead, we envision a distribution model much closer to Blastwave's (or to any number of similar systems with which you may be familiar, such as Gentoo or the BSD Ports systems)." why reinvent the wheel? is it NIH (not invented here) syndrome Blastwave has over 1400 packages ported. Seems like a waste, to start again, if you want to create a different installer so be it, but you can still borrow from blastwave's work or perhaps you can work together as offered previosly? > (a) it has no owner - since you care that it's out of date, you should > volunteer to become the owner! > > (b) its owner has been remiss in his or her responsibilities. > Consider contacting that individual. This works in exactly the same > way as in other software distributions. > > (c) there are sound technical reasons to continue using an older > release of the component. > > > Thus all of its libraries will be useless to Blastwave. Most of the > > non Sun OpenSolaris distro's are about being new, fresh, and > > inventive, Blastwave embraces them and helps to extend them; CCD > > probably won't be compatible with them so once again CCD will be > > useless for those communities as well. > > More groundless assumptions here, I'm afraid. > do something to show that the assumptions are false. please, this has all been lip service, show some code, create a site. etc. > > I guess if you have the "magic pass key" into the CCD project aka > > being a Sun ID holder, so that you actually have input and can > > actually see what is happening you can get excited about the totally > > secluded project, for me even if it has the latest everything on > > release date, it will be a non issue because the project goes against > > every OpenSource principle, just the way that the Sun people that are > > pushing the project like it. If they didn't want it that way, the > > process would have been opened years ago, or at least post OpenSolaris > > launch date. > > The only thing my "magic pass key" has entitled me to see is the > extent to which the CCD has been neglected by Sun. That neglect is > responsible for both the stale nature of the content itself and the > lengthy delay in opening this project (put another way, the lengthy > delay in enabling non-Sun contributions to CCD development). Instead > of castigating the dedicated volunteers who are contributing our > personal time to making the very changes you so bitterly demand, you > would do well to discard your mistaken assumptions and participate in > the steps we're trying to take. > > In the next 1-2 months, we expect to: > > - offer a means for individuals both within and without Sun to become > owners of any Companion Software component, > > - provide direct realtime access to the source base, including the > ability to make changes without a Sun sponsor, > > - expose an inventory of software, with owners, similar to that > provided by Blastwave and other products, > > - document the steps necessary to contribute a Companion Software > component, the steps necessary to build and deploy Companion Software, > and the tools used in developing the source base, > > - become an early prototype for realtime collaborative development > processes and tools which will later be used by OpenSolaris > consolidations, including SFW and ON. > > Long-term success for this project would (in my personal view) include > all of: > > - voluntary and cooperative incorporation of all other third-party > companion software stacks, including both Blastwave and Sunfreeware, > and - at least as importantly - their stewards, maintainers, and > contributors, > > - agreement on a single unified distribution model, > > - innovation in areas of interest to all software distributions, such > as improvements to autotools and pkg-config, > > - a meaningful and reasonable solution for support of multiple > distinct Solaris releases, and possibly distinct releases of other > OpenSolaris distributions as well, without the maddening and wasteful > duplication of (usually incompatible) software, > > - a dramatic increase in the size and scope of available software even > beyond the union of the SFW, CSW, and Sunfreeware offerings. > > We welcome most enthusiastically contributions from individuals > associated with other efforts in this space, and invite an open and > constructive debate concerning solutions to any or all of these > important problems. > > And we'd like all of this to take place on the project mailing lists, > not opensolaris-discuss. > nice ideas.. 75% of it is allready in place but ignored,,, it's called Blastware. James Dickens > -- > Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" > Solaris Kernel Team "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" > _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
