Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name

2007-11-02 Thread John Plocher
Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > ... > I'm looking past the immediate firestorm here to the big picture. I > haven't forgotten where we are today and I don't dispute the need for > carefully considered action to address it. But it's helpful to think > about where we need to go. > Extremely well sai

Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name

2007-11-01 Thread Shawn Walker
On 01/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 01/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> >Solaris is Solaris; OpenSolaris is a separate thing. To imply > >> >OpenSolaris is Solaris is a mistake no matter which distribution > >> >represents it. You also sh

Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name

2007-11-01 Thread Casper . Dik
>On 01/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >Solaris is Solaris; OpenSolaris is a separate thing. To imply >> >OpenSolaris is Solaris is a mistake no matter which distribution >> >represents it. You also shouldn't make implications without claims. So >> >far, Indiana has don

Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name

2007-11-01 Thread Shawn Walker
On 01/11/2007, Keith M Wesolowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 03:14:15PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > > > Solaris is Solaris; OpenSolaris is a separate thing. To imply > > OpenSolaris is Solaris is a mistake no matter which distribution > > represents it. You also shouldn't

Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name

2007-11-01 Thread Shawn Walker
On 01/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Solaris is Solaris; OpenSolaris is a separate thing. To imply > >OpenSolaris is Solaris is a mistake no matter which distribution > >represents it. You also shouldn't make implications without claims. So > >far, Indiana has done nothi

Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name

2007-11-01 Thread Keith M Wesolowski
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 03:14:15PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > Solaris is Solaris; OpenSolaris is a separate thing. To imply > OpenSolaris is Solaris is a mistake no matter which distribution > represents it. You also shouldn't make implications without claims. So > far, Indiana has done nothing

Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name

2007-11-01 Thread Casper . Dik
>Solaris is Solaris; OpenSolaris is a separate thing. To imply >OpenSolaris is Solaris is a mistake no matter which distribution >represents it. You also shouldn't make implications without claims. So >far, Indiana has done nothing permanent that causes deviation from >Solaris or OpenSolaris origi