I cut the distribution down, but probably not enough. Others please
feel free to cut even more. Perhaps the first mail should have gone to
"announce" and follow-ups to "approach". I can't tell Brian's intent.
Brian sent me private mail asking why I was against this. If he's
unclear, I think others are unclear, hence this clarification.
I didn't say OSH was a good or bad thing. At the moment, I'm neither
for it or against it.
I just said that more than 1/2 of the justifications appear unrelated to
OSH.
They can either happen or not independent of OSH existing. Waiting to
work on the important ones in this list because of a mis-conception that
OSH must happen first would be a very bad thing.
I don't think anyone should be selling OSH as the cure for cancer.
The first reason listed is a big one. In my mind, it is 99.44% of any
reason
for doing this. In all honesty, it may be a big enough reason by itself.
#2 is probably important to a lot of folk. Its just not important to
me. I'm
a capitalist, not a "free as in speech" fanatic. No judgment implied.
Few, if any, of the other issues require OSH to allow them to be addressed.
A couple of them might be easier in an OSH context. None of these
seemed important (IMHO).
I probably do have a bias that I think the cost of producing a distro (even
an unsupported one) is higher than I think many believe. That predisposes
me to think at the moment there are better things to work on - like
replacing
those nasty "closed" bits, some of which has to happen before OSH can
happen. That is a predisposition as to "when", not "if". At the moment, I
really am neutral on "if".
Clear?
- jek3
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
