Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-23 Thread Jacob Ritorto 
Wow, they actually did the right thing in the end.  This is fantastic.
 I'm all too happy to eat as much crow as you have to offer.  I wonder
when (if?) they'll bring back the ability to purchase OpenSolaris
subscriptions online..

I'm actually so happy right now that I even appreciate Tim's clueless
would-be cynicisms :)



On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Tim Cook  wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:11 AM, Jacob Ritorto 
> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry to beat the dead horse, but I've just found perhaps the only
>> written proof that OpenSolaris is supportable.  For those of you who
>> deny that this is an issue, its existence as a supported OS has been
>> recently erased from every other place I've seen on the Oracle sites.
>> Everyone please grab a copy of this before they silently delete it and
>> claim that it never existed.  I'm buying a contract right now.  I may
>> just take back every mean thing I ever said about Oracle.
>>
>> http://www.sun.com/servicelist/ss/lgscaledcsupprt-us-eng-20091001.pdf
>>
>
>
> Erased from every site?   Assuming when I pointed out several links the
> first go round wasn't enough, how bout directly on the opensolaris page
> itself?
> http://www.opensolaris.com/learn/features/availability/
> • Highly available open source based solutions ready to deploy on
> OpenSolaris with full production support from Sun.
> OpenSolaris enables developers to develop, debug, and globally deploy
> applications faster, with built-in innovative features and with full
> production support from Sun.
>
> Full production level support
>
> Both Standard and Premium support offerings are available for deployment of
> Open HA Cluster 2009.06 with OpenSolaris 2009.06 with following
> configurations:
>
> etc. etc. etc.
>  So do you get paid directly by IBM then, or is it more of a "consultant"
> type role?
> --Tim
>
>
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-23 Thread Tim Cook 
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:11 AM, Jacob Ritorto wrote:

> Sorry to beat the dead horse, but I've just found perhaps the only
> written proof that OpenSolaris is supportable.  For those of you who
> deny that this is an issue, its existence as a supported OS has been
> recently erased from every other place I've seen on the Oracle sites.
> Everyone please grab a copy of this before they silently delete it and
> claim that it never existed.  I'm buying a contract right now.  I may
> just take back every mean thing I ever said about Oracle.
>
> http://www.sun.com/servicelist/ss/lgscaledcsupprt-us-eng-20091001.pdf
>
>

Erased from every site?   Assuming when I pointed out several links the
first go round wasn't enough, how bout directly on the opensolaris page
itself?

http://www.opensolaris.com/learn/features/availability/

• Highly available open source based solutions ready to deploy on
OpenSolaris with *full production support from Sun. *
OpenSolaris enables developers to develop, debug, and globally deploy
applications faster, with built-in innovative features and with *full
production support from Sun.*
*
*
*Full production level support

Both Standard and Premium support offerings are available for deployment of
Open HA Cluster 2009.06 with OpenSolaris 2009.06 with following
configurations:
*

etc. etc. etc.

 So do you get paid directly by IBM then, or is it more of a "consultant"
type role?

--Tim
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-23 Thread Jacob Ritorto 
Sorry to beat the dead horse, but I've just found perhaps the only
written proof that OpenSolaris is supportable.  For those of you who
deny that this is an issue, its existence as a supported OS has been
recently erased from every other place I've seen on the Oracle sites.
Everyone please grab a copy of this before they silently delete it and
claim that it never existed.  I'm buying a contract right now.  I may
just take back every mean thing I ever said about Oracle.

http://www.sun.com/servicelist/ss/lgscaledcsupprt-us-eng-20091001.pdf


On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Erik Trimble  wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 20:52 -0500, Thomas Burgess wrote:
>> "There may be some things we choose not to open source going forward,
>> similar to how MySQL manages certain value-add[s] at the top of the
>> stack," Roberts said. "It's important to understand the plan now is to
>> deliver value again out of our IP investment, while at the same time
>> measuring that with continuing to deliver OpenSolaris in the open."
>>
>>         "This will be a balancing act, one that we'll get right
>>         sometimes, but may not always."
>>
>>         -
>>         From the feedback data I've seen customers dislike this type
>>         of licensing model most.  Dan may or may not be reading this,
>>         but I'd strongly discourage this approach.  Without knowing
>>         more I don't know what alternative I could recommend though..
>>         (Too bad I missed that irc meeting..)
>>
>>         ./C
>>
>>
>>
>> I may be wrong, but isn't this already what they do?  I mean, there is
>> a bunch of proprietary stuff in solaris that didn't make it into
>> opensolaris.  I thought this was how they did things anyways, or am i
>> misunderstanding something.
>>
>
> Not quite. The stuff that didn't make it from Solaris Nevada into
> OpenSolaris was pretty much everything that /couldn't/ be open-sourced,
> or was being EOL'd in any case. We didn't really hold anything back
> there.
>
> The better analogy is what Tim Cook pointed out, which is the version of
> OpenSolaris that runs on the 7000-series storage devices. There's some
> stuff on there that isn't going to be putback into the OpenSolaris
> repos.
>
>
> I don't know, and I certainly can't speak for the project, but I suspect
> the type of enhancements which won't make it out into the OpenSolaris
> repos are indeed ones like we ship with the 7000-series hardware. That
> is, I doubt that you will be able to get an "OpenSolaris with Oracle
> Improvements" software distro/package - the proprietary stuff will only
> be used as part of a package bundle, since Oracle is big on
> one-stop-integrated-solution things.
>
>
> --
> Erik Trimble
> Java System Support
> Mailstop:  usca22-123
> Phone:  x17195
> Santa Clara, CA
> Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800)
>
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-01 Thread Erik Trimble 
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 20:52 -0500, Thomas Burgess wrote:
> "There may be some things we choose not to open source going forward,
> similar to how MySQL manages certain value-add[s] at the top of the
> stack," Roberts said. "It's important to understand the plan now is to
> deliver value again out of our IP investment, while at the same time
> measuring that with continuing to deliver OpenSolaris in the open."
> 
> "This will be a balancing act, one that we'll get right
> sometimes, but may not always."
> 
> -
> From the feedback data I've seen customers dislike this type
> of licensing model most.  Dan may or may not be reading this,
> but I'd strongly discourage this approach.  Without knowing
> more I don't know what alternative I could recommend though..
> (Too bad I missed that irc meeting..)
> 
> ./C
> 
> 
> 
> I may be wrong, but isn't this already what they do?  I mean, there is
> a bunch of proprietary stuff in solaris that didn't make it into
> opensolaris.  I thought this was how they did things anyways, or am i
> misunderstanding something.
> 

Not quite. The stuff that didn't make it from Solaris Nevada into
OpenSolaris was pretty much everything that /couldn't/ be open-sourced,
or was being EOL'd in any case. We didn't really hold anything back
there.

The better analogy is what Tim Cook pointed out, which is the version of
OpenSolaris that runs on the 7000-series storage devices. There's some
stuff on there that isn't going to be putback into the OpenSolaris
repos.


I don't know, and I certainly can't speak for the project, but I suspect
the type of enhancements which won't make it out into the OpenSolaris
repos are indeed ones like we ship with the 7000-series hardware. That
is, I doubt that you will be able to get an "OpenSolaris with Oracle
Improvements" software distro/package - the proprietary stuff will only
be used as part of a package bundle, since Oracle is big on
one-stop-integrated-solution things.


-- 
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop:  usca22-123
Phone:  x17195
Santa Clara, CA
Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800)

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-01 Thread C. Bergström 

Thomas Burgess wrote:
"There may be some things we choose not to open source going forward, 
similar to how MySQL manages certain value-add[s] at the top of the 
stack," Roberts said. "It's important to understand the plan now is to 
deliver value again out of our IP investment, while at the same time 
measuring that with continuing to deliver OpenSolaris in the open."



"This will be a balancing act, one that we'll get right sometimes,
but may not always."

-
>From the feedback data I've seen customers dislike this type of
licensing model most.  Dan may or may not be reading this, but I'd
strongly discourage this approach.  Without knowing more I don't
know what alternative I could recommend though.. (Too bad I missed
that irc meeting..)

./C

I may be wrong, but isn't this already what they do?  I mean, there is 
a bunch of proprietary stuff in solaris that didn't make it into 
opensolaris.  I thought this was how they did things anyways, or am i 
misunderstanding something.
Not exactly..  From my understanding.. (and I put a lot of time removing 
the proprietary "stuff") is that for OpenSolaris the closed parts simply 
weren't available under and open source license.


example..
tail/cli - Probably from 20+ years ago and it's exact origins may not be 
all known
libc - The wide character support in libc from IBM, who isn't exactly 
open source friendly
drivers - I didn't look into specific things with drivers and just never 
used them.

C++ runtime/compilers - no comment :)

With regards to the 7000 series or other appliances which may bring the 
trolls further...  Personally, I consider that an appliance and not 
OpenSolaris proper..  I don't know where I draw the line, but I'd be 
disappointed if zfs didn't have all the full features in OpenSolaris, 
but also surprised if the landscape and management interfaces were made 
open source.

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-01 Thread Thomas Burgess 
"There may be some things we choose not to open source going forward,
similar to how MySQL manages certain value-add[s] at the top of the stack,"
Roberts said. "It's important to understand the plan now is to deliver value
again out of our IP investment, while at the same time measuring that with
continuing to deliver OpenSolaris in the open."

>
> "This will be a balancing act, one that we'll get right sometimes, but may
> not always."
>
> -
> From the feedback data I've seen customers dislike this type of licensing
> model most.  Dan may or may not be reading this, but I'd strongly discourage
> this approach.  Without knowing more I don't know what alternative I could
> recommend though.. (Too bad I missed that irc meeting..)
>
> ./C
>
> I may be wrong, but isn't this already what they do?  I mean, there is a
bunch of proprietary stuff in solaris that didn't make it into opensolaris.
I thought this was how they did things anyways, or am i misunderstanding
something.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-01 Thread Tim Cook 
2010/3/1 "C. Bergström" 

> Troy Campbell wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 02/24/10 12:04 PM, Marc Nicholas wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Troy Campbell >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/sun-oracle-community-continuity.html
>>>
>>>Half way down it says:
>>>Will Oracle support Java and OpenSolaris User Groups, as Sun has?
>>>
>>>Yes, Oracle will indeed enthusiastically support the Java User
>>>Groups, OpenSolaris User Groups, and other Sun-related user group
>>>communities (including the Java Champions), just as Oracle actively
>>>supports hundreds of product-oriented user groups today. We will be
>>>reaching out to these groups soon.
>>>
>>> Supporting doesn't necessarily mean continuing the Open Source projects!
>>>
>>>  More info:
>>
>>
>> http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3867771/OpenSolaris-Alive-and-Well-at-Oracle.htm
>>
> "There may be some things we choose not to open source going forward,
> similar to how MySQL manages certain value-add[s] at the top of the stack,"
> Roberts said. "It's important to understand the plan now is to deliver value
> again out of our IP investment, while at the same time measuring that with
> continuing to deliver OpenSolaris in the open."
>
> "This will be a balancing act, one that we'll get right sometimes, but may
> not always."
>
> -
> From the feedback data I've seen customers dislike this type of licensing
> model most.  Dan may or may not be reading this, but I'd strongly discourage
> this approach.  Without knowing more I don't know what alternative I could
> recommend though.. (Too bad I missed that irc meeting..)
>
> ./C
>
>
So don't buy the 7000 series.  I find no issue with that model.

--Tim
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-01 Thread C. Bergström 

Troy Campbell wrote:



On 02/24/10 12:04 PM, Marc Nicholas wrote:



On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Troy Campbell mailto:troy.campb...@fedex.com>> wrote:


http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/sun-oracle-community-continuity.html 



Half way down it says:
Will Oracle support Java and OpenSolaris User Groups, as Sun has?

Yes, Oracle will indeed enthusiastically support the Java User
Groups, OpenSolaris User Groups, and other Sun-related user group
communities (including the Java Champions), just as Oracle actively
supports hundreds of product-oriented user groups today. We will be
reaching out to these groups soon.

Supporting doesn't necessarily mean continuing the Open Source projects!


More info:

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3867771/OpenSolaris-Alive-and-Well-at-Oracle.htm 

"There may be some things we choose not to open source going forward, 
similar to how MySQL manages certain value-add[s] at the top of the 
stack," Roberts said. "It's important to understand the plan now is to 
deliver value again out of our IP investment, while at the same time 
measuring that with continuing to deliver OpenSolaris in the open."


"This will be a balancing act, one that we'll get right sometimes, but 
may not always."


-
From the feedback data I've seen customers dislike this type of 
licensing model most.  Dan may or may not be reading this, but I'd 
strongly discourage this approach.  Without knowing more I don't know 
what alternative I could recommend though.. (Too bad I missed that irc 
meeting..)


./C

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-03-01 Thread Troy Campbell 



On 02/24/10 12:04 PM, Marc Nicholas wrote:



On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Troy Campbell mailto:troy.campb...@fedex.com>> wrote:


http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/sun-oracle-community-continuity.html

Half way down it says:
Will Oracle support Java and OpenSolaris User Groups, as Sun has?

Yes, Oracle will indeed enthusiastically support the Java User
Groups, OpenSolaris User Groups, and other Sun-related user group
communities (including the Java Champions), just as Oracle actively
supports hundreds of product-oriented user groups today. We will be
reaching out to these groups soon.

Supporting doesn't necessarily mean continuing the Open Source projects!


More info:

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3867771/OpenSolaris-Alive-and-Well-at-Oracle.htm

-marc

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-25 Thread Ross Walker 
On Feb 25, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Giovanni Tirloni   
wrote:


On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Jacob Ritorto > wrote:

It's a kind gesture to say it'll continue to exist and all, but
without commercial support from the manufacturer, it's relegated to
hobbyist curiosity status for us.  If I even mentioned using an
unsupported operating system to the higherups here, it'd be considered
absurd.  I like free stuff to fool around with in my copious spare
time as much as the next guy, don't get me wrong, but that's not the
issue.  For my company, no support contract equals 'Death of
OpenSolaris.'

OpenSolaris is not dying just because there is no support contract  
available for it, yet.


Last time I looked Red Hat didn't offer support contracts for Fedora  
and that project is doing quite well.


Difference here is Redhat doesn't claim Fedora as a production OS.

While CentOS is a derivative of RHEL and also comes with no support  
contracts as it just recompiles RHEL source one gets the inherited  
binary support through this and technical support through the community.


OpenSolaris not being as transparent and more leading edge doesn't get  
the stability of binary support that Solaris has and the community is  
always playing catch-up on the technical details. Which make it about  
as suitable for production use as Fedora.


The commercial support contracts attempted to bridge the gap between  
the lack of knowledge due to the newness and the binary stability with  
patches. Without it OS is no longer really production quality.


A little scattered in my reasoning but I think I get the main idea  
across.


-Ross

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-25 Thread Giovanni Tirloni 
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Jacob Ritorto wrote:

> It's a kind gesture to say it'll continue to exist and all, but
> without commercial support from the manufacturer, it's relegated to
> hobbyist curiosity status for us.  If I even mentioned using an
> unsupported operating system to the higherups here, it'd be considered
> absurd.  I like free stuff to fool around with in my copious spare
> time as much as the next guy, don't get me wrong, but that's not the
> issue.  For my company, no support contract equals 'Death of
> OpenSolaris.'
>

OpenSolaris is not dying just because there is no support contract available
for it, yet.

Last time I looked Red Hat didn't offer support contracts for Fedora and
that project is doing quite well.

So please be a little more realistic and say "For my company, no support
contracts for OpenSolaris means that we will not use it in our
mission-critical servers". That's much more reasonable than saying the whole
project is jeopardized.

It's useless to try to decide your strategy right now when things are
changing. Wait for some official word from Oracle and then decide what your
company is going to do. You can always install Solaris if that makes sense
for you.

-- 
Giovanni Tirloni
sysdroid.com
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-25 Thread Jacob Ritorto 
It's a kind gesture to say it'll continue to exist and all, but
without commercial support from the manufacturer, it's relegated to
hobbyist curiosity status for us.  If I even mentioned using an
unsupported operating system to the higherups here, it'd be considered
absurd.  I like free stuff to fool around with in my copious spare
time as much as the next guy, don't get me wrong, but that's not the
issue.  For my company, no support contract equals 'Death of
OpenSolaris.'

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:29 AM, Peter Tribble  wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Michael Schuster
>  wrote:
>> perhaps this helps:
>>
>> http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Linux-and-Open-Source/Oracle-Explains-Unclear-Message-About-OpenSolaris-444787/
>
> Not really. It doesn't explain that the page in question was an
> explanation of how the
> OpenSolaris support model has worked for the past 18 months. The fact
> that people
> interpreted an unchanged 18-month old support policy (defined well
> before the acquisition
> was even mooted) as the death of the OpenSolaris project shows how
> crazy the world
> can get.
>
> I notice that the support page seems to have changed, though. In that
> it now says the
> GA period is until the next release, rather than the originally
> defined arbitrary
> 6-month timer. (You can still see the 6-month timer in the support
> periods for 2008.05
> and 2008.11, though - notice that both of those left the GA phase
> before the next
> release happened.)
>
> Whether Oracle make changes in the future remains to be seen. I would expect
> them to (you can't turn around a loss-making acquisition into a
> profitable subsidiary
> without making changes).
>
> In terms of OpenSolaris, the word is that a position statement is due shortly.
>
> --
> -Peter Tribble
> http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-25 Thread Peter Tribble 
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Michael Schuster
 wrote:
> perhaps this helps:
>
> http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Linux-and-Open-Source/Oracle-Explains-Unclear-Message-About-OpenSolaris-444787/

Not really. It doesn't explain that the page in question was an
explanation of how the
OpenSolaris support model has worked for the past 18 months. The fact
that people
interpreted an unchanged 18-month old support policy (defined well
before the acquisition
was even mooted) as the death of the OpenSolaris project shows how
crazy the world
can get.

I notice that the support page seems to have changed, though. In that
it now says the
GA period is until the next release, rather than the originally
defined arbitrary
6-month timer. (You can still see the 6-month timer in the support
periods for 2008.05
and 2008.11, though - notice that both of those left the GA phase
before the next
release happened.)

Whether Oracle make changes in the future remains to be seen. I would expect
them to (you can't turn around a loss-making acquisition into a
profitable subsidiary
without making changes).

In terms of OpenSolaris, the word is that a position statement is due shortly.

-- 
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-25 Thread Michael Schuster 

perhaps this helps:

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Linux-and-Open-Source/Oracle-Explains-Unclear-Message-About-OpenSolaris-444787/

Michael

On 02/24/10 20:02, Troy Campbell wrote:

http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/sun-oracle-community-continuity.html


Half way down it says:
Will Oracle support Java and OpenSolaris User Groups, as Sun has?


...

--
Michael Schusterhttp://blogs.sun.com/recursion
Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion'
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-24 Thread Marc Nicholas 
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Troy Campbell wrote:

>
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/sun-oracle-community-continuity.html
>
> Half way down it says:
> Will Oracle support Java and OpenSolaris User Groups, as Sun has?
>
> Yes, Oracle will indeed enthusiastically support the Java User Groups,
> OpenSolaris User Groups, and other Sun-related user group communities
> (including the Java Champions), just as Oracle actively supports hundreds of
> product-oriented user groups today. We will be reaching out to these groups
> soon.
>

Supporting doesn't necessarily mean continuing the Open Source projects!

-marc
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-24 Thread Troy Campbell 

http://www.oracle.com/technology/community/sun-oracle-community-continuity.html

Half way down it says:
Will Oracle support Java and OpenSolaris User Groups, as Sun has?

Yes, Oracle will indeed enthusiastically support the Java User Groups, 
OpenSolaris User Groups, and other Sun-related user group communities 
(including the Java Champions), just as Oracle actively supports 
hundreds of product-oriented user groups today. We will be reaching out 
to these groups soon.


Hope this helps,
Troy


On 02/22/10 02:22 PM, Henrik Johansen wrote:

On 02/22/10 09:52 PM, Tim Cook wrote:



On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Jacob Ritorto mailto:jacob.rito...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Since it seems you have absolutely no grasp of what's happening here,


Coming from the guy proclaiming the sky is falling without actually
having ANY official statement whatsoever to back up that train of
thought.

perhaps it would be best for you to continue to sit idly by and let
this happen. Thanks helping out with the crude characterisations
though.


Idly let what happen? The unconfirmed death of opensolaris that you've
certified for us all without any actual proof?


Well - the lack of support subscriptions *is* a death sentence for
OpenSolaris in many companies and I believe that this is what the OP
complained about.



Do you understand that the OpenSolaris page has a sunset in
it and the Solaris page doesn't?


I understand previous versions of every piece of software Oracle sells
have Sunset pages, yes. If you read the page I sent you, it clearly
states that every release of Opensolaris gets 5 years of support from
GA. That doesn't mean they aren't releasing another version. That
doesn't mean they're ending the opensolaris project. That doesn't mean
they are no longer selling support for it. Had you actually read the
link I posted, you'd have figured that out.

Sun provides contractual support on the OpenSolaris OS for up to five
years from the product's first General Availability (GA) date as
described .
OpenSolaris Package Updates are released approximately every 6 months.
OpenSolaris Subscriptions entitle customers during the term of the
Customer's Subscription contract to receive support on their current
version of OpenSolaris, as well as receive individual Package Updates
and OpenSolaris Support Repository Package Updates when made
commercially available by Sun. Sun may require a Customer to download
and install Package Updates or OpenSolaris OS Updates that have been
released since Customer's previous installation of OpenSolaris,
particularly when fixes have already been

Have you spent enough (any) time
trying to renew your contracts only to see that all mentions of
OpenSolaris have been deleted from the support pages over the last few
days?


Can you tell me which Oracle rep you've spoken to who confirmed the
cancellation of Opensolaris? It's funny, nobody I've talked to seems to
have any idea what you're talking about. So please, a name would be
wonderful so I can direct my inquiry to this as-of-yet unnamed source.


I have spoken to our local Oracle sales office last week because I
wanted to purchase a new OpenSolaris support contract - I was informed
that this was no longer possible and that Oracle is unable to provide
paid support for OpenSolaris at this time.



This, specifically, is what has been yanked out from under me
and my company. This represents years of my and my team's effort and
investment.


Again, without some sort of official word, nothing has changed...


I take the official Oracle website to be rather ... official ?

Lets recap, shall we ?

a) Almost every trace of OpenSolaris Support subscriptions vanished from
the official website within the last 14 days.

b) An Oracle sales rep informed me personally last week that I could no
longer purchase support subscriptions for OpenSolaris.

Please, do me a favor and call your local Oracle rep and ask for an
Opensolaris Support subscription quote and let us know how it goes ...



It says right here those contracts are for both solaris AND opensolaris.

http://www.sun.com/service/subscriptions/index.jsp

Click Sun System Service Plans
:
http://www.sun.com/service/serviceplans/sunspectrum/index.jsp


Sun System Service Plans for Solaris

Sun System Service Plans for the Solaris Operating System provide
integrated hardware and* Solaris OS (or OpenSolaris OS)* support service
coverage to help keep your systems running smoothly. This single price,
complete system approach is ideal for companies running Solaris on Sun
hardware.



Sun System Service Plans != (Open)Solaris Support subscriptions


But thank you for the scare chicken little.





--Tim




___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Matthias Pfützner 

Oops, sorry, right, 9 months... ;-)

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-

Von: Alan Coopersmith 
Cc: jacob.rito...@gmail.com, zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, 
indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org, t...@cook.ms
Gesendet: 22.2.'10,  22:03

Matthias Pfützner wrote:

(change in control) and the cycle of the next version of OSOL (did you
notice, that it might be 2010.03, and not 2010.02, aka 7 months?) 


9 months actually since 2009.06, and that change was mostly due to aligning
with the Solaris 10 update release schedules so that the resources shared
between the two (such as QA) wouldn't be overloaded trying to get both
OpenSolaris 2010.12 and Solaris 10 10/09 finished up around the same time
(or when many of them would be normally out for the end-of-year holidays).

--
 -Alan Coopersmith-   alan.coopersm...@sun.com
  Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Alan Coopersmith 
Matthias Pfützner wrote:
> (change in control) and the cycle of the next version of OSOL (did you
> notice, that it might be 2010.03, and not 2010.02, aka 7 months?) 

9 months actually since 2009.06, and that change was mostly due to aligning
with the Solaris 10 update release schedules so that the resources shared
between the two (such as QA) wouldn't be overloaded trying to get both
OpenSolaris 2010.12 and Solaris 10 10/09 finished up around the same time
(or when many of them would be normally out for the end-of-year holidays).

-- 
-Alan Coopersmith-   alan.coopersm...@sun.com
 Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Matthias Pfützner 

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-

Von: Jacob Ritorto 
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org
Gesendet: 22.2.'10,  21:46

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Justin Lee Ewing
 wrote:

I'm not sure how there is mistreatment when known that Solaris 10 is the
current production-grade product and OpenSolaris, for all intents and
purposes, a beta product that is currently under active development.  I was
actually surprised when SUN provided a level of support for OpenSolaris
above and beyond bug reporting and resolution.


So be it, but the point is that they did offer and push it,
guaranteeing the same level of support as Solaris, etc.  I (perhaps
foolishly) believed it and invested heavily in it. For them to go back
on this is an affront to the idea of being a reliable, trusted
provider.  I'd expect this sort of behaviour from some of the lesser
technology companies, but not from Sun and Oracle.  This is what's
supposed to set them apart.


I think, we all got your point, and do agree, that there SEEMS to be a 
regression. But, as stated, give Oracle a bit of time, to simply CHECK each and 
every offering, that Sun had! Do you know, for example, that Oracle does offer 
LIVETIME support for products? Something, that Sun never did? So, let's relax, 
sit down, and drink a cup of good tea, and let's wait and see... And possibly 
talk about this topic in two months time...


And while I respect your opinion that Solaris 10 is a "current
production-grade product," to me, the reality is that it's many
versions behind in its huge number of bundled services and it's a lot
of work to trim down. 


Still, it's a FACT, that S10 is the product, and OSOL is a community effort, 
and provides previee snapshots twice a year...


Its footprint is enormous compared to
OpenSoalris and its not nearly as modern.  I've worked on it since
before it was called Solaris, so I've lived with this for decades now.


Same here, SunOS 3.5 on a Sun 3/50...


 To keep up with these fresh (albeit comparatively crude) Linux
variants, this paradigm had to change and OpenSolaris was the
solution.  Thin and modern but still tremendously more solid than the
others.   That's essentially why we adopted it en masse.


And as Solaris is that mature and around so long alrewady, please give the new owner the 
chance to get up to speed! And don't complain after less then 4 weeks about your 
perceived "fate of OpenSolaris"...

That's all we're asking here...

Again: I have to repeat: I have no insight whatsoever into the proceedings at 
Oracle around the topics discussed here

Matthias
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Matthias Pfützner 

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-

Von: Jacob Ritorto 
Cc: matth...@pfuetzner.de, zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, 
indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org
Gesendet: 22.2.'10,  21:21

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Tim Cook  wrote:



On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Jacob Ritorto 
wrote:


2010/2/22 Matthias Pfützner :
> You (Jacob Ritorto) wrote:
>> FWIW, I suspect that this situation does not warrant a "Wait and See"
>> response.  We're being badly mistreated here and it's probably too
>> late to do anything about it.  Probably the only chance to quell this
>> poor stewardship is to get big and loud right away.  Then we can see
>> if Oracle actually respects the notion of community.
>
> Badly mistreated "here"?
>
> Bad words, you're using, please change them! And, if you have a problem,
> escalate with your Sales-Rep!
>

Of course I will escalate with my sales rep, buy sorry, Matthias, I won't
condone having the carpet yanked out from under me and my business
while putting on a happy face in the forums.  This has to be addressed
in public.  If the word "here" offends you, please take it to mean "as
a consumer group."




You haven't had anything yanked out from under you.   You found an
end-of-service-life page which is fairly standard practice, then decided to
freak out about it.

http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml

The reason there's an end of service page is because Oracle isn't going to
be supporting 2009.06 for 30 years.  I don't see how that lead you to the
conclusion they're ending the opensolaris project, but that is one hell of a
conclusion to jump to.

--Tim


Since it seems you have absolutely no grasp of what's happening here,
perhaps it would be best for you to continue to sit idly by and let
this happen.  Thanks helping out with the crude characterisations
though.  Do you understand that the OpenSolaris page has a sunset in
it and the Solaris page doesn't?  Have you spent enough (any) time
trying to renew your contracts only to see that all mentions of
OpenSolaris have been deleted from the support pages over the last few
days?  This, specifically, is what has been yanked out from under me
and my company.  This represents years of my and my team's effort and
investment.



And, honestly, that's not something strange, is it?

Two facts:

1.) Solaris is a product, maintained and produced 100% by Sun!
2.) OpenSolaris is a community effort, and Sun's been providing the initial 
version of it, as well as many development resources. Still, OSOL has never 
been a 100% maintained and produced product of Sun!

So, yes, Sun did provide support contracts for OSOL, based on a 6-month basis (as that's the cycle for new 
versions of OSOL). Now, the CiC (change in control) and the cycle of the next version of OSOL (did you 
notice, that it might be 2010.03, and not 2010.02, aka 7 months?) do "collide", and you are drawing 
the "conclusion", that the internal process of checking ALL offers (and be sure, as I stated, the 
OSOL support contracts did not generate a margin!) and STANDARDIZING those offers entitles you to state, that 
support is cancled? Boy, there are way more important contracts to check then the OSOL support offerings. And 
I assume, ou also want to see "Sun" flourishing and providing an operative income to Oracle's 
business. Because, if that will not happen, many other things might happen... And support contracts for OSOL 
might then be so unimportant, that nobody might ever remember, that such things even existed once...

There are way more changes currently, then you seem to notice. NONE of those 
entitle you to state, that there will NEVER EVER be support for OSOL.

Give the folks at Oracle some time to perform a thorough and intensive check of 
all of Sun's former offerings, and also give them the time to figure, what to 
do with all those things! And, yes, make sure, that your voice is heard INSIDE 
Oracle. But, please, do not try to boil the ocean now by claiming end of 
support...

And, if that should leave you "unsupported" in about two to three months time, 
then you could start trying to state, that there might not be a commercial support offer 
from Oracle for OpenSolaris...

There the still is the possibility to create your own company which coukd offer 
support for OSOL, just like RedHat and Novell are doing with Linux. And, yes, 
Nexenta currenly already does that, so, there are already options out there!

Again: I have no insight into what's going on inside Oracle w.r.t. the topics 
discussed here!

My only commen is: Try to relax a bit, and please calm down!

Matthias 
___

zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris (Please end this now)

2010-02-22 Thread Erik Trimble 


From what I can gleen from the new sections of the relevant website, it 
appears that you /can/ get OpenSolaris support, provided you have SUN 
hardware and a System Service plan.  The traditional "I want OS Support 
for running Solaris on my non-Sun hardware" plan doesn't include 
OpenSolaris.   I'd re-ask your sales rep to check that this is so (that 
is, if buying a Solaris Subscriiption will cover both S10 & 
OpenSolaris), just to be sure.  They may not understand that both are 
now provided under the same product plan (i.e. no separate plan for OS 
vs S10); then again...



All that said, this discussion is MARKETING, and as such, belongs on 
another list (such as opensolaris-discuss or better yet, directly with 
Oracle).  Please, take if off this list, as there's no good answer to be 
found here.






--
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop:  usca22-123
Phone:  x17195
Santa Clara, CA

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Henrik Johansen 

On 02/22/10 09:52 PM, Tim Cook wrote:



On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Jacob Ritorto mailto:jacob.rito...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Since it seems you have absolutely no grasp of what's happening here,


Coming from the guy proclaiming the sky is falling without actually
having ANY official statement whatsoever to back up that train of thought.

perhaps it would be best for you to continue to sit idly by and let
this happen.  Thanks helping out with the crude characterisations
though.


Idly let what happen?  The unconfirmed death of opensolaris that you've
certified for us all without any actual proof?


Well - the lack of support subscriptions *is* a death sentence for 
OpenSolaris in many companies and I believe that this is what the OP 
complained about.




Do you understand that the OpenSolaris page has a sunset in
it and the Solaris page doesn't?


I understand previous versions of every piece of software Oracle sells
have Sunset pages, yes.  If you read the page I sent you, it clearly
states that every release of Opensolaris gets 5 years of support from
GA.  That doesn't mean they aren't releasing another version.  That
doesn't mean they're ending the opensolaris project.  That doesn't mean
they are no longer selling support for it.  Had you actually read the
link I posted, you'd have figured that out.

Sun provides contractual support on the OpenSolaris OS for up to five
years from the product's first General Availability (GA) date as
described .
OpenSolaris Package Updates are released approximately every 6 months.
OpenSolaris Subscriptions entitle customers during the term of the
Customer's Subscription contract to receive support on their current
version of OpenSolaris, as well as receive individual Package Updates
and OpenSolaris Support Repository Package Updates when made
commercially available by Sun. Sun may require a Customer to download
and install Package Updates or OpenSolaris OS Updates that have been
released since Customer's previous installation of OpenSolaris,
particularly when fixes have already been

  Have you spent enough (any) time
trying to renew your contracts only to see that all mentions of
OpenSolaris have been deleted from the support pages over the last few
days?


Can you tell me which Oracle rep you've spoken to who confirmed the
cancellation of Opensolaris?  It's funny, nobody I've talked to seems to
have any idea what you're talking about.  So please, a name would be
wonderful so I can direct my inquiry to this as-of-yet unnamed source.


I have spoken to our local Oracle sales office last week because I 
wanted to purchase a new OpenSolaris support contract - I was informed 
that this was no longer possible and that Oracle is unable to provide 
paid support for OpenSolaris at this time.




  This, specifically, is what has been yanked out from under me
and my company.  This represents years of my and my team's effort and
investment.


Again, without some sort of official word, nothing has changed...


I take the official Oracle website to be rather ... official ?

Lets recap, shall we ?

a) Almost every trace of OpenSolaris Support subscriptions vanished from 
the official website within the last 14 days.


b) An Oracle sales rep informed me personally last week that I could no 
longer purchase support subscriptions for OpenSolaris.


Please, do me a favor and call your local Oracle rep and ask for an 
Opensolaris Support subscription quote and let us know how it goes ...




It says right here those contracts are for both solaris AND opensolaris.

http://www.sun.com/service/subscriptions/index.jsp

Click Sun System Service Plans
:
http://www.sun.com/service/serviceplans/sunspectrum/index.jsp


  Sun System Service Plans for Solaris

Sun System Service Plans for the Solaris Operating System provide
integrated hardware and* Solaris OS (or OpenSolaris OS)* support service
coverage to help keep your systems running smoothly. This single price,
complete system approach is ideal for companies running Solaris on Sun
hardware.



Sun System Service Plans != (Open)Solaris Support subscriptions


But thank you for the scare chicken little.





--Tim



--
Med venlig hilsen / Best Regards

Henrik Johansen
hen...@scannet.dk
Tlf. 75 53 35 00

ScanNet Group
A/S ScanNet
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Tim Cook 
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Jacob Ritorto wrote:

>
> Since it seems you have absolutely no grasp of what's happening here,
>

Coming from the guy proclaiming the sky is falling without actually having
ANY official statement whatsoever to back up that train of thought.


> perhaps it would be best for you to continue to sit idly by and let
> this happen.  Thanks helping out with the crude characterisations
> though.


Idly let what happen?  The unconfirmed death of opensolaris that you've
certified for us all without any actual proof?



> Do you understand that the OpenSolaris page has a sunset in
> it and the Solaris page doesn't?


I understand previous versions of every piece of software Oracle sells have
Sunset pages, yes.  If you read the page I sent you, it clearly states that
every release of Opensolaris gets 5 years of support from GA.  That doesn't
mean they aren't releasing another version.  That doesn't mean they're
ending the opensolaris project.  That doesn't mean they are no longer
selling support for it.  Had you actually read the link I posted, you'd have
figured that out.

Sun provides contractual support on the OpenSolaris OS for up to five years
from the product's first General Availability (GA) date as
described.
OpenSolaris Package Updates are released approximately every 6 months.
OpenSolaris Subscriptions entitle customers during the term of the
Customer's Subscription contract to receive support on their current version
of OpenSolaris, as well as receive individual Package Updates and
OpenSolaris Support Repository Package Updates when made commercially
available by Sun. Sun may require a Customer to download and install Package
Updates or OpenSolaris OS Updates that have been released since Customer's
previous installation of OpenSolaris, particularly when fixes have already
been



>  Have you spent enough (any) time
> trying to renew your contracts only to see that all mentions of
> OpenSolaris have been deleted from the support pages over the last few
> days?


Can you tell me which Oracle rep you've spoken to who confirmed the
cancellation of Opensolaris?  It's funny, nobody I've talked to seems to
have any idea what you're talking about.  So please, a name would be
wonderful so I can direct my inquiry to this as-of-yet unnamed source.




>  This, specifically, is what has been yanked out from under me
> and my company.  This represents years of my and my team's effort and
> investment.
>

Again, without some sort of official word, nothing has changed...


It says right here those contracts are for both solaris AND opensolaris.

http://www.sun.com/service/subscriptions/index.jsp

Click Sun System Service
Plans
:
http://www.sun.com/service/serviceplans/sunspectrum/index.jsp

Sun System Service Plans for Solaris

Sun System Service Plans for the Solaris Operating System provide integrated
hardware and* Solaris OS (or OpenSolaris OS)* support service coverage to
help keep your systems running smoothly. This single price, complete system
approach is ideal for companies running Solaris on Sun hardware.


But thank you for the scare chicken little.




--Tim
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Jacob Ritorto 
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Justin Lee Ewing
 wrote:
> I'm not sure how there is mistreatment when known that Solaris 10 is the
> current production-grade product and OpenSolaris, for all intents and
> purposes, a beta product that is currently under active development.  I was
> actually surprised when SUN provided a level of support for OpenSolaris
> above and beyond bug reporting and resolution.

So be it, but the point is that they did offer and push it,
guaranteeing the same level of support as Solaris, etc.  I (perhaps
foolishly) believed it and invested heavily in it. For them to go back
on this is an affront to the idea of being a reliable, trusted
provider.  I'd expect this sort of behaviour from some of the lesser
technology companies, but not from Sun and Oracle.  This is what's
supposed to set them apart.

And while I respect your opinion that Solaris 10 is a "current
production-grade product," to me, the reality is that it's many
versions behind in its huge number of bundled services and it's a lot
of work to trim down.  Its footprint is enormous compared to
OpenSoalris and its not nearly as modern.  I've worked on it since
before it was called Solaris, so I've lived with this for decades now.
 To keep up with these fresh (albeit comparatively crude) Linux
variants, this paradigm had to change and OpenSolaris was the
solution.  Thin and modern but still tremendously more solid than the
others.   That's essentially why we adopted it en masse.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Jacob Ritorto 
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Tim Cook  wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Jacob Ritorto 
> wrote:
>>
>> 2010/2/22 Matthias Pfützner :
>> > You (Jacob Ritorto) wrote:
>> >> FWIW, I suspect that this situation does not warrant a "Wait and See"
>> >> response.  We're being badly mistreated here and it's probably too
>> >> late to do anything about it.  Probably the only chance to quell this
>> >> poor stewardship is to get big and loud right away.  Then we can see
>> >> if Oracle actually respects the notion of community.
>> >
>> > Badly mistreated "here"?
>> >
>> > Bad words, you're using, please change them! And, if you have a problem,
>> > escalate with your Sales-Rep!
>> >
>>
>> Of course I will escalate with my sales rep, buy sorry, Matthias, I won't
>> condone having the carpet yanked out from under me and my business
>> while putting on a happy face in the forums.  This has to be addressed
>> in public.  If the word "here" offends you, please take it to mean "as
>> a consumer group."
>>
>>
>
> You haven't had anything yanked out from under you.   You found an
> end-of-service-life page which is fairly standard practice, then decided to
> freak out about it.
>
> http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml
>
> The reason there's an end of service page is because Oracle isn't going to
> be supporting 2009.06 for 30 years.  I don't see how that lead you to the
> conclusion they're ending the opensolaris project, but that is one hell of a
> conclusion to jump to.
>
> --Tim

Since it seems you have absolutely no grasp of what's happening here,
perhaps it would be best for you to continue to sit idly by and let
this happen.  Thanks helping out with the crude characterisations
though.  Do you understand that the OpenSolaris page has a sunset in
it and the Solaris page doesn't?  Have you spent enough (any) time
trying to renew your contracts only to see that all mentions of
OpenSolaris have been deleted from the support pages over the last few
days?  This, specifically, is what has been yanked out from under me
and my company.  This represents years of my and my team's effort and
investment.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Justin Lee Ewing 
I'm not sure how there is mistreatment when known that Solaris 10 is the 
current production-grade product and OpenSolaris, for all intents and 
purposes, a beta product that is currently under active development.  I 
was actually surprised when SUN provided a level of support for 
OpenSolaris above and beyond bug reporting and resolution.


The fact that OpenSolaris has a major "release" every 6+ months does 
not, in my opinion, say "this is production ready" but provides a major 
point where significant user acceptance testing on features and bugs can 
be completed. This is quite different than the development repository 
which can and does contain variable bits.


As far as the EOSL schedule goes, it is clearly a non-production 
schedule. Opposite to this model is Solaris 10's support... where the 
entire OS since GA date is supported.  Could you imagine if individual 
Solaris 10 Updates had an EOSL schedule like OpenSolaris?  I suspect 
that when OpenSolaris gets to the point of being considered a 
production-grade product, the GA date release onward will be supported 
like Solaris 10 is today.  Of course, this is dependent on Oracle's 
decisions.


Again, all this is just my opinion... take it for what it is.



On 02/22/10 11:12 AM, Jacob Ritorto wrote:

2010/2/22 Matthias Pfützner:
   

You (Jacob Ritorto) wrote:
 

FWIW, I suspect that this situation does not warrant a "Wait and See"
response.  We're being badly mistreated here and it's probably too
late to do anything about it.  Probably the only chance to quell this
poor stewardship is to get big and loud right away.  Then we can see
if Oracle actually respects the notion of community.
   

Badly mistreated "here"?

Bad words, you're using, please change them! And, if you have a problem,
escalate with your Sales-Rep!

 

Of course I will escalate with my sales rep, buy sorry, Matthias, I won't
condone having the carpet yanked out from under me and my business
while putting on a happy face in the forums.  This has to be addressed
in public.  If the word "here" offends you, please take it to mean "as
a consumer group."
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
   


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Tim Cook 
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Jacob Ritorto wrote:

> 2010/2/22 Matthias Pfützner :
> > You (Jacob Ritorto) wrote:
> >> FWIW, I suspect that this situation does not warrant a "Wait and See"
> >> response.  We're being badly mistreated here and it's probably too
> >> late to do anything about it.  Probably the only chance to quell this
> >> poor stewardship is to get big and loud right away.  Then we can see
> >> if Oracle actually respects the notion of community.
> >
> > Badly mistreated "here"?
> >
> > Bad words, you're using, please change them! And, if you have a problem,
> > escalate with your Sales-Rep!
> >
>
> Of course I will escalate with my sales rep, buy sorry, Matthias, I won't
> condone having the carpet yanked out from under me and my business
> while putting on a happy face in the forums.  This has to be addressed
> in public.  If the word "here" offends you, please take it to mean "as
> a consumer group."
>
>
>
You haven't had anything yanked out from under you.   You found an
end-of-service-life page which is fairly standard practice, then decided to
freak out about it.

http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml

The reason there's an end of service page is because Oracle isn't going to
be supporting 2009.06 for 30 years.  I don't see how that lead you to the
conclusion they're ending the opensolaris project, but that is one hell of a
conclusion to jump to.

--Tim
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Matthias Pfützner 
You (Jacob Ritorto) wrote:
> FWIW, I suspect that this situation does not warrant a "Wait and See"
> response.  We're being badly mistreated here and it's probably too
> late to do anything about it.  Probably the only chance to quell this
> poor stewardship is to get big and loud right away.  Then we can see
> if Oracle actually respects the notion of community.

Badly mistreated "here"?

Bad words, you're using, please change them! And, if you have a problem,
escalate with your Sales-Rep!

BTW: If you look at Oracle, and it's support-contracts all over the product
line/range, you can try to draw conclusions. One such conclusion might be:
"simple, standard offering" and not "millions of diverse options". So, I would
still opt for "wait and see"...

BTW2: I'm NOT talking for Oracle, nor Sun, I simply don't have any insight into
these things, I'm just concluding like you! And: The fact, that there still is
opensolaris.org does send a message!

BTW3: Do NOT expect ANY official statement from Oracle here, that simply will
not happen! (my sincere gut feeling!)

So, talk to your Service-Sales Rep, and escalate, if need be!

   Matthias
-- 
Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER  | Linux will become very
Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | important.
D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487  | 
Germany  | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Ted Nelson
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] future of OpenSolaris

2010-02-22 Thread Jacob Ritorto 
2010/2/22 Matthias Pfützner :
> You (Jacob Ritorto) wrote:
>> FWIW, I suspect that this situation does not warrant a "Wait and See"
>> response.  We're being badly mistreated here and it's probably too
>> late to do anything about it.  Probably the only chance to quell this
>> poor stewardship is to get big and loud right away.  Then we can see
>> if Oracle actually respects the notion of community.
>
> Badly mistreated "here"?
>
> Bad words, you're using, please change them! And, if you have a problem,
> escalate with your Sales-Rep!
>

Of course I will escalate with my sales rep, buy sorry, Matthias, I won't
condone having the carpet yanked out from under me and my business
while putting on a happy face in the forums.  This has to be addressed
in public.  If the word "here" offends you, please take it to mean "as
a consumer group."
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss