Since no one objected and the timer ran out, I marked this
case as 'closed approved' in the IAM file.
Dan
Daniel Hain wrote:
> I am sponsoring this case for Martina Tomisova. Timeout is set for 5/02/2008.
> Man pages and the default configuration file are in the case directory.
>
>
> Template V
[...]
> In my mind, EVERY SINGLE FOSS project out there[1]
> should be available
> in a repository, in ready-to-run binary form, waiting
> for someone who
> needs it to download on their OpenSolaris system.
>
> Now, if you were saying "only *some of them* should
> be considered
> candidates to bec
Hi,
>1) What is the FISH protocol? (Never heard of it.)
Citation from wikipedia:
FIles transferred over SHell protocol is a protocol to use SSH or RSH to
transfer files between computers and manage remote files.
The advantage of FISH is that all it requires on the server-side is an SSH or
John Plocher wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> bloat
>
> Think of the compiler world, where there are the concepts of
> "part of the compiler", "part of the hosting OS", "add-on
> features and libraries" and "customer provided stuff".
>
> In the OS world, this concept might result in the followin
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> bloat
Think of the compiler world, where there are the concepts of
"part of the compiler", "part of the hosting OS", "add-on
features and libraries" and "customer provided stuff".
In the OS world, this concept might result in the following
classifications:
A) "part of
Bart Smaalders wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
>>
>> (I am one of those developers -- and I think I'm in the minority here
>> -- that actually cares about bloat, and believes that systems should
>> get faster, not slower, as time goes on. In other words I believe
>> that the fight against the
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
> (I am one of those developers -- and I think I'm in the minority here --
> that actually cares about bloat, and believes that systems should get
> faster, not slower, as time goes on. In other words I believe that the
> fight against the tendency of system software
Gary Winiger wrote:
>> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>>
>>> And the rationale is quite simple -- more code in Solaris == more
>>> effort to sustain, support, larger install image, bigger download,
>>> generally more "bloat".
>>>
>> I disagree.
>>
>> I strongly *suspect* it is less effort to
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> > And the rationale is quite simple -- more code in Solaris == more
> > effort to sustain, support, larger install image, bigger download,
> > generally more "bloat".
> I disagree.
>
> I strongly *suspect* it is less effort to "sustain, support" the
> plethora of FOSS
Gary Winiger wrote:
Release bind is Micro.
>> Deliverables:
>> /etc/lftp.conf
>>
>
> Why is there a /etc file? What is the file used for?
> What is the administrative interface for this file?
>
This provides default configuration options for lftp. It requires root
acc
I don't think Gary said that the binding had to be major, only that in
the absence of a release binding specified by the project, what can we
assume? Major is the only "safe" assumption because it has no
compatibility requirements. If the project team doesn't like a Major
binding (and I agree
John Plocher wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> Checking the lftp site, it seems that lftp is perhaps superior to
>> ncftp in some ways.
>> I wonder though, is it possible to write a wrapper for lftp so that
>> it can emulate ncftp? I'm all for taking the latest improvements
>> from the open s
Gary Winiger wrote:
> And the Release Binding is? How about Major?
In this case, why would Major be a requirement?
(he asks naively, trying to inject architectural clarity into this
type of conversation...)
Personally, I see nothing in this case that would require a major release.
It make
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Checking the lftp site, it seems that lftp is perhaps superior to ncftp
> in some ways.
>
> I wonder though, is it possible to write a wrapper for lftp so that it
> can emulate ncftp? I'm all for taking the latest improvements from the
> open source community, but I
Sorry for the number of these comments. I should have done them
all at once ;-)
> Deliverables:
What about the tutorial? http://tutorials.papamike.ca/pub/lftp.html
It seem like it would be useful to ship.
I presume Martina will be joining the lftp commun
> 6. Resources and Schedule
> 6.4. Steering Committee requested information
> 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name:
> sfw
> 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack
> 6.6. ARC Exposure: open
And the Release Binding is? How about Major?
Gary..
> Deliverables:
> /etc/lftp.conf
Why is there a /etc file? What is the file used for?
What is the administrative interface for this file?
> /usr/share/man/man1/lftp.1
> /usr/share/man/man1/lftpget.1
It seems the materials are incomplete. These are not
Checking the lftp site, it seems that lftp is perhaps superior to ncftp
in some ways.
I wonder though, is it possible to write a wrapper for lftp so that it
can emulate ncftp? I'm all for taking the latest improvements from the
open source community, but I still think it would be "nice" to m
Bart Smaalders wrote:
> Please stop. What part of software repository do you not understand?
The part about it not being part of Solaris 10 or Nevada perhaps? :-)
Talk about "histrionics",... There is no case log for Indiana.
- jek3
I am sponsoring this case for Martina Tomisova. Timeout is set for 5/02/2008.
Man pages and the default configuration file are in the case directory.
Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.66 04/17/08 SMI
This information is Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems
1. Introduction
1.1. Project/Componen
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> And the rationale is quite simple -- more code in Solaris == more
> effort to sustain, support, larger install image, bigger download,
> generally more "bloat".
I disagree.
I strongly *suspect* it is less effort to "sustain, support" the
plethora of FOSS ftp versions by
21 matches
Mail list logo
