[ I trimmed the lists in the Cc to sfwnv-discuss and ports-discuss ] On Thu, 10 May 2007, Steve Stallion wrote: > Eric, > > The document describes problems and/or missing features with each of > the projects you have posted. > framework to fill the gaps (namely distribution and support of > source-build and pre-build packages) for *anyone* who desires to > provide third party software, whether that is Sun, Blastwave, SFE, > etc.
OK, but the premise still seems invalid to me. Reason being, from what I can tell, you wrote the proposal without first seeking input from the key lead people from the projects you're targeting. And not just SFW/CCD/JDS/Blastwave, e.g. Phil Brown, Duvall, Hahn, etc., but also, and maybe even more importantly, their counterparts in the projects under the Installation and Packaging Community Group. Eric > It is a middle ground for all of these projects to meet and > define something that benefits the user rather than our individual > egos. > > The intent of OPM is that it is a > > FWIW: There is absolutely no reason why pkgbuild would not be used as > the build agent and was in fact, the original intent. > > SFW/CCD has its own separate issues, which Dennis Clarke (and several > others) have been quite vocal about - particularly the fact that F/OSS > packages are not suited for long term support of a single revision > which is the traditional form in Solaris (hence the need for Blastwave > et all to build and install their own *duplicate* packages that > support newer revisions). > > If everything was working 'just fine' today, these types (and number > of) projects would simply not exist. You do not see competing projects > on other OS's (*BSD is an exccelnt example) because there is simply no > need - the OS distribution has everything a user needs to support > his/her own environment. > > The community has requested this time and time again. Several > implementations exist today. We need to come to a common agreement, > and move onto a single system.
