On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It appears to me that item #2 can be broken down further. The idea of
having a reference distribution is totally different from the
requirement to be compatible.
Right; AFAIK distributions like "Nexenta" would not fall under the
"compatible" definition and that would be a shame.
Totally agree.
What I would like a reference distribution to be is a starting point
for folks who want to build their own distribution...
YES.
; those initial > steps are likely to be the hardest.
Being able to do something as simple as "make opensolaris.iso" which
would give you a *reference* distribution would be extremely worthwhile;
YES.
it lowers the barrier to entry for those who want to play at that
level.
(Including, of course, instructions on how to add stuff, etc)
There is some benefit from compatibility guarantees, as the binary
compatibility guarantee in *Solaris* (not the Open one) has shown.
Indeed, if we want *compatible*, I think you would hold *Solaris Nevada*
as the gold standard for compatibility.
YES.
Strongly agree on all counts.
Eric
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
