Updated Usage Guidelines - version DRAFT 0.03
NOT APPROVED FOR USE
The intent of this trademark and branding policy is to encourage
compatibility among the various distros being developed within the
OpenSolaris community. This compatibility is important to users, ISVs
and developers; it encompass
On 26/10/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/26/07, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Brandorr wrote:
> > > It seems this discussion is not leading anywhere. And Sun is doing
> > > what Sun is going to do.
> >
> > So, lead it where you want it to go. Make a proposal!
> >
>
On 10/26/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 26/10/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I want the following distros to coexist:
> >
> > SolarisNG, OpenSolaris Distro - Indiana
> > Belenix, OpenSolaris Distro - SolarisNG with KDE (or whatever Moinak
> > and team want to do
On 10/26/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26/10/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/26/07, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Brandorr wrote:
> > > > It seems this discussion is not leading anywhere. And Sun is doing
> > > > what Sun is going to do.
> > >
>
> If you're talking about i18n and the sparc dissasembler, I'm sure you
> know that these are the process of being replaced.
The Sparc dissassembler work was done by Jason King within the
infrastructure at Blastwave. So that is pretty far outside the Sun
firewalls.
I don't know about the i18n
On 26/10/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/26/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 26/10/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 10/26/07, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Brandorr wrote:
> > > > > It seems this discussion is not leading anywh
Brandorr wrote:
>> so again I ask you - please make a counter proposal. Be part of
>> the solution!
>
> Proposal: No distro will be named OpenSolaris.
I updated the wiki to include this
> John's proposal, as I understand, is that only people/teams that can
> use the OpenSolaris trademark as a s
Brandorr wrote:
> A compatibility test, that says, "verify that this is the same exact
> set of bits" is an audit, not a compatibility test. You are defining
> compatibility in such a way that only the thing being tested against
As the one who wrote those words, along with an email stating that:
>
