Why didn't *BSD use the OpenSolaris versioning system, that is, naming releases after states? Its certainly more logical than aribitrary numbering systems, especially after the "towns" that the original Berkeley authors used.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Gary <g_patri...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Why didn't Sun use the engineering path of FreeBSD and OpenBSD, namely the > -release, -stable, -current branches instead of doing the OpenSolaris thing > to pry it into the next Solaris 10 successor? > > For example, FreeBSD had the framework for virtual networking in the 7.2 > release and it is available in 8.0, although it isn't ready for production, > but should be in 8.1. > > Why couldn't Crossbow had been put in Solaris -current and then it makes > its way into Solaris -release? When ready for production release it becomes > Solaris 11. > > OpenSolaris is more like OpenBSD forking from NetBSD. OpenBSD is NOT > NetBSD and vice versa. OpenSolaris may be a fork of Solaris, but it IS a > different operating system. > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org >
_______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
