* Laszlo (Laca) Peter <laca at sun.com> [2006-12-14 11:12]: > Let me open a can of worms, or a couple of them (: > > On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 07:55 -0800, Dermot McCluskey wrote: > > Package Names > > ============= > > SUNWbison (unchanged) Committed > > > SUNWbisonS (unchanged) Committed > > I suspect that the purpose of the SFW source packages was to satisfy > the GPL requirement of publishing the changed sources and build > environment. Is that still relevant now that everything is published > on opensolaris.org? I am trying to get the current policy reexplained because I, too, think it needs changing.
> > SUNWsfman (unchanged) Committed > > SUNWsfinf (unchanged) Committed > > Again, I know this has been like that since the dawn of SFW, and it > was obviously modeled from SUNWman. But I would argue that > if we create separate Solaris packages for each GNU package, then the > place of the manual pages is in those packages, together with the > artifacts that they describe. Same goes for info docs. Yes, I think I agree with this, too. The bundle-up-similar-items packaging algorithm appears to have more drawbacks than advantages. - Stephen -- Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems stephen.hahn at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
