On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Mike Gerdts <mger...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 3:09 AM, Erik Trimble <erik.trim...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > All that said, I'm still a little mystified as to why the "normal" > > development builds are being held back. > > Could it be because "pkg image update" is known to work pretty well > going forward (b134 -> b134b) but is known not to work well or is > untested for going backward (b142 -> b134b)? Or could there be other > things (e.g zfs version 23 in b135) that would make going back to > b134b problematic? If so, I suspect that this is a matter of > protecting people from getting into a state where they can't > transition from a dev build to a release build.
I think that is pretty weak excuse. The same people didn't need such protection for all the time since 2009.06, bu all of a sadden they do need it ? Think about it. Those people who want to live on a bleeding edge, are clever/experienced enough to know how to manage their boot environments. And those who didn't need a hot_just_from_the_oven release stayed with 2009.06 and won't be affected anyhow. > People that really want to do development can (subject to periodic > hiccups) do development on current bits by building their own. Yup, that's right. However, I think that the idea of development release is to make it _easier_ for people to get on, rather than making it harder. There are more folks out there that need dev release to bootstrap, than those who can manage to build it themseves. Otherwise why to bother publishing developer build at all ? Just my thoughts. -- Regards, Cyril _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
