Now all of what you said makes sense when you think of it from Sun's PoV - all
is well when it comes to Sun wanting to enforce control over the whole
OpenSolaris thing. This is exactly how a company will drive it's product
development.
If you cared to come out and peek into a general oss coder
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 13:45, S Destika wrote:
> Other lovely thing about Linux is that you are free to do what you like - and
> not be driven by what Linus or Andrew think. Ok, so you didn't like GIT for
> some reason, take Mercurial or do your own SCM and move along - work
> continues to happen
First off,
Thankyou for responding to me/Alan/JimG/...
S Destika wrote:
Now all of what you said makes sense when you think of it from Sun's
PoV - all is well when it comes to Sun wanting to enforce control
over the whole OpenSolaris thing. This is exactly how a company will
drive it's product
Hi there, I would like more infos about:
>>http://www.sun.com/emrkt/campaign_docs/expertexchange/knowledge/solaris_zfs_gen.html#10
>>Q: Any thoughts on porting ZFS to Linux, AIX, or HPUX?
>>A: No plans of porting to AIX and HPUX. Porting to Linux is currently being
>>investigated.
Is this still
Daniel Johnsen wrote:
Hi there, I would like more infos about:
http://www.sun.com/emrkt/campaign_docs/expertexchange/knowledge/solaris_zfs_gen.html#10
Q: Any thoughts on porting ZFS to Linux, AIX, or HPUX? A: No
plans of porting to AIX and HPUX. Porting to Linux is currently
being investigated.
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Cyril Plisko wrote:
Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Mike Kupfer wrote:
Question for the wider community: how important is access to the
tarballs from prior deliveries?
To me personaly it's not that important, as I have all previous versions
stored on my com
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Daniel Johnsen wrote:
> Hi there, I would like more infos about:
> >>http://www.sun.com/emrkt/campaign_docs/expertexchange/knowledge/solaris_zfs_gen.html#10
> >>Q: Any thoughts on porting ZFS to Linux, AIX, or HPUX?
> >>A: No plans of porting to AIX and HPUX. Porting to Linux
Thanks James for taking the time to write - it clearly shows you guys are
willing to listen, which is a good thing.
I can't make it more simpler than this - OpenSolaris needs a third, independent
party here controlling and running the show - someone whom people trust to be
unbiased and not driv
On 8/29/05, S Destika <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't make it more simpler than this - OpenSolaris needs a third,
> independent party here controlling and running the show - someone whom people
> trust to be unbiased and not driven by commercial interests. (That excludes
> Sun and Sun appoi
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, S Destika wrote:
> I can't make it more simpler than this - OpenSolaris needs a third,
> independent party here controlling and running the show - someone whom
> people trust to be unbiased and not driven by commercial interests.
OpenSolaris DOES have an independant controlli
I agree it is early to criticise but that's also when you can easily address
the criticism. Regarding my ability to criticise the processes - I am talking
as a independent watcher rather than a contributor or a zealot and I talked
all of my things based on facts. I think I explained them in a
I should note here that I do not necessarily have a problem with CDDL although
I would prefer GPL for my personal purposes. It's just that I was pointing
towards the lost benefits from not going the GPL way and ways Sun can counter
it.
Nothing in my post was intended to start a GPL vs. CDDL fla
On 8/29/05, S Destika <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I should note here that I do not necessarily have a problem with CDDL
> although I would prefer GPL for my personal purposes. It's just that I was
> pointing towards the lost benefits from not going the GPL way and ways Sun
> can counter it.
>
On 8/29/05, S Destika <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree it is early to criticise but that's also when you can easily address
> the criticism. Regarding my ability to criticise the processes - I am
> talking as a independent watcher rather than a contributor or a zealot and I
> talked all of
>I didn't see any suggestion on ways they could counter possible
perceived loss of benefits though, what I did see was a complaint
about it being CDDL instead of GPL.
You either did not read all of what I wrote or read only those crispy flammable
portions! :)
Anyway - Opening up the whole proces
BTW, where is the code for this forum - I am feeling inclined to fix few things
- "Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: " in the subject lines for example! That way I can
claim to be a contributor and can push more of my agendas down people's
throat!! - Just kidding, don't take it seriously!
This message pos
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, S Destika wrote:
> Anyway - Opening up the whole process, making it friendly and
> encouraging community to handle the matters instead of Sun forcing
> things upon them and letting the community run the show - these were
> the few key things I mentioned were the ways to counte
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, S Destika wrote:
> Anyway - Opening up the whole process, making it friendly and
encouraging community to handle the matters instead of Sun forcing
things upon them and letting the community run the show - these were
Further to my other post, what's the difference between Sun
S Destika wrote:
Sun has made the first mistake with CDDL - they no longer can benefit from the load of GPL software
Not really - the bits newly released have gone from a proprietary
license incompatible to the GPL to the CDDL. Nothing was lost there.
And the only incompatibility is in puttin
Well, that's good to hear - I was just being impatient then.
What's the difference between Linus forcing and Sun forcing - Well isn't that
an obvious one - Sun is a company with commercial interests and Linus has
proved himself to be a unbiased individual - he carefully avoids being employed
by
How much is the code going to help with incompatible licenses? I suppose Linux
distros could use the userland side of ZFS, and from what I know this is a big
deal because ZFS is as much a volume manager as a filesystem, but what about
the kernel side? CDDL code can't be distributed with the kern
* S Destika ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Well, that's good to hear - I was just being impatient then.
>
> What's the difference between Linus forcing and Sun forcing - Well isn't that
> an obvious one - Sun is a company with commercial interests and Linus has
> proved himself to be a unbiased in
Well, that's good to hear - I was just being impatient then. What's the difference between Linus forcing and Sun forcing - Well isn't that an obvious one - Sun is a company with commercial interests and Linus has proved himself to be a unbiased individual - he carefully avoids being employed by an
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, S Destika wrote:
> You are on the CAB which again is appointed by Sun and so far looks
> to me is driven more by Sun's interests and concerns rather than the
> CAB's. (2 months is enough time for anyone with technical skills and
Please take a few minutes to read about the CAB
Letting each and every thing inside the kernel is not a definition of
"Unbiased". Almost always there are technical reasons behind not allowing a
change. If Linus hadn't proved himself to be unbiased people would have
stopped contributing to the Linux kernel a long time back - it's getting more
Ok - Agreed. I will check back later.
(I noted the email id of every one who participated in this
discussion - I will start flaming again next year if I find OpenSolaris still
doesn't have a open and easy process for contributing code!! ;) )
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, S Destika wrote:
> (I noted the email id of every one who participated in
> this discussion - I will start flaming again next year if I find
> OpenSolaris still doesn't have a open and easy process for contributing
> code!! ;) )
You won't be the only one! :-)
Seriously, sti
Without bringing up every point that you've made (which has been done by
others) I have a couple of points to make and I'd like to solicit your
comments on.
First; perception is in the eye of the beholder. If its your perception
that (and I hope I don't mis-represent you here):
- that the bug f
Joerg> I thought I was on osol-code but then it seems I am not
Hmm, you're listed in the mailman membership list.
Did you get any of the messages that were posted since Friday?
Joerg> it is impossible to subscribe if the mailman interface does not
Joerg> work
What problem are you having w
Steve,
That's good! Please do!
ajd
On Friday 26 August 2005 09:52 pm, Steven Christensen wrote:
> I would be happy to be involved in such a group.
>
> Steve Christensen
> sunfreeware.com
> Durham, NC
>
> On 8/26/05, Albertson, Brett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Michael,
> > I'm in the RTP, NC
Thanks for the long explanation.
My concern is that things are not moving at a good enough pace, they are not
going in the right direction and the slow pace is due to Sun's highly
bureaucratic governance. Secondly the process isn't open and inviting enough -
The complete Solaris development ha
> "Cyril" == Cyril Plisko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mike> Question for the wider community: how important is access to the
Mike> tarballs from prior deliveries?
Dragan> To me personaly it's not that important, as I have all previous
Dragan> versions stored on my computer. But providing a CV
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:27, Mike Kupfer wrote:
> Cyril> http://svn.genunix.org/repos/ doing exactly that - all the source
> Cyril> drops are there.
>
> Are the files available for download via a Subversion client? Or is
> just the web interface available?
It looks like svn.genunix.org is servin
S Destika wrote:
Thanks for the long explanation.
> My concern is that things
are not moving at a good enough pace, they are not going in the right
direction and the slow pace is due to Sun's highly bureaucratic
governance. Secondly the process isn't open and inviting enough - The
complete Sola
I'm a bit late replying the last time I was at the oracle campus a few weeks
ago I only saw solaris and windows machines so not all dev machines are RHEL
also all of oracle's backend production database machines are running solaris
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/rmd?entry=oaug
rgds
Would it be too much to ask for you to assume good faith on the part of Sun?
I realize that we're a profit-seeking corporation, and therefore evil, but we
really are trying to make this work. One group works on taking over the world
and perverting all that's sweetness and light, while the other i
S Destika wrote:
Thanks for the long explanation.
My concern is that things are not moving at a good enough pace, they are not going in the right direction and the slow pace is due to Sun's highly bureaucratic governance.
Please bear in mind the the CAB members also have day jobs. It is a
s
> My concern is that things are not moving at a good enough pace, they are
> not going in the right direction and the slow pace is due to Sun's highly
> bureaucratic governance. Secondly the process isn't open and inviting
> enough - The complete Solaris development has to be opened up - Sun
> Eng
Steven,
My sense from following this conversation is that you've listened to
what the Sun folks have said about the pace, direction, and the current
process (e.g. bug fixing, CAB, SCM), and yet you're still unconvinced
that we're moving forward as quickly as we can.
What advice would you
Robert W. Fuller wrote:
Stephen Lau wrote:
The CVS repository tarball that we put up for download, starting
with the 8/18 release, has diffs and revisions for all the post-launch
source drops... is that sufficient?
Ok Where are these? Do you mean the file
opensolaris-src-20050818.t
I'd like to propose the creation of a new community that focuses
on Dynamic Linking. Primarily, this would discuss issues regarding
the runtime linker (ld.so.1(1)), and link-editor (ld(1)). However,
having supported these utilities for some time now, the core issues
that are normally discussed re
I have pretty much said it already that much has to be done and OpenSolaris unfortunately does not have the luxury of taking it at a slow pace. At a slow pace the interest in OpenSolaris will fade off - I fear. I am not sure if I can "advise" nor do I have a concrete plan but all I can sayis that
Steven -
Thanks for the input - it's certainly valuable to understand external
perception around what we're doing. Some specific responses are below.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:17:47PM -0400, Steven Destika wrote:
> I am not sure if I can "advise" nor do I have a concrete plan
> but all I can
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:17:47PM -0400, Steven Destika wrote:
> I have pretty much said it already that much has to be done and
> OpenSolaris unfortunately does not have the luxury of taking it at a
> slow pace. At a slow pace the interest in OpenSolaris will fade off -
> I fear. I am not sure
> And this is _only_ industry conferences -- I'm not including Sun-sponsored
> conferences and public events. (And even then, I'm sure I forgot some
> conference or conferences where we presented -- apologies for those that
> I missed.)
And of course, I missed (at least) one: FISL '05. I fee
On 8/29/05, Jake Maciejewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How much is the code going to help with incompatible licenses?
[...]
> CDDL code can't be distributed with the kernel, so everything would have to
> be rewritten.
License issues don't seem to have prevented distribution of a Linux
port of
46 matches
Mail list logo
