On Friday 04 May 2007 15:42, Brian Gupta wrote: > > I am OK with all of this, with partial reservations on [5]. My > > reservations are not based on the substance of [5], but on the > > logistics of [5]. I am operating under the assumption that > > defining "core" Solaris is probably a task to be shared with Sun > > Microsystems, Inc., whereas defining "core" OpenSolaris would be > > a task to be delegated to the Community, or a Community-delegated > > Working Group, or any other such Community-based entity. > > Can we agreed that the current consumer of the work done through > OpenSolaris.org is Sun Microsystems? (Through Solaris, and Sun's > downstream customers)
Yes, i have absolutely no reservations whatsoever on this point. > That said, a Sun employee is by fact a representative of Sun, as > their involvement in OpenSolaris is paid for by Sun. I don't think > there is a need to make a distinction between Solaris and > OpenSolaris at this time. Cool, fine with me. > > But, maybe things have recently changed dramatically and I am > > simply unaware of these changes. > > Seems to me changes are afoot. Wow. ;-) --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman 'Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition' KDE e.V. -Monty Python stefan.teleman at gmail.com
