James Carlson wrote:
John Mark Walker writes:
Very good points. Thank you for taking the time to write that. Following
is my best attempt at an answer:
James Carlson wrote:
It effectively shuts down the possibility of alternate distributions
that focus on different needs and different areas.
This is where we fundamentally disagree. An
[official|reference|experimental] OpenSolaris distribution would not
shut down this possibility. You're assuming that an OpenSolaris project
will magically fulfill all of the requirements of its users - it will
not.
I suspect it will seriously curtail the ability for other
distributions to walk outside of the lines set by the reference
distribution.
Look what happened with Fedora Core - "extras" repositories pop up
all over the place, giving users an easy way to supplement what came
from RedHat. It's important to note that the Extras repo is now an
The situation is not analogous to that one. There isn't a "Linux
reference distribution." Nobody is held accountable for being
compatible with that sort of situation. Instead, there are multiple
Linux-based distributions, each of which is free to do its own thing.
(The most notable difference being .deb versus .rpm; but many others
exist.)
What's being proposed here seems quite a bit different. It's a
community distribution akin to getting full system binaries from
kernel.org, and expecting each of RedHat, Debian, and the others to do
something "compatible."
Debian provides a different example of community collaboration, where
another community (Ubuntu) develops to fill the gaps. Debian has always
been a fully functional Linux-based operating system, and yet, there
were still gaps to be filled by downstream developers. Other communities
formed around those gaps. The end result is not the same as the Fedora
example above, but it's another example of the reference distro not
shutting out community innovation.
It does however constrain it.
A healthy ecosystem is a badge of success. Our difference of opinion
stems from your belief that an official distro would cut off the
ecosystem. I don't buy that argument, because I've seen too many
examples where an official distro fed the downstream innovation.
So, if the reference distribution decides that SysV packaging is the
right answer, should Nexenta be expected to disappear?
I think having a "Sun Experimental" distribution -- something even
less structured than SX -- would be neat to have, and may well satisfy
a fair percentage of folks interested in this new distribution.
However, I'm not sure I understand the point of having a specific
OpenSolaris reference distribution, or its risks.
I think the experimental distro would be interesting - and maybe this
issue boils down to semantics, after all.
That's possible. It's the issue of the use of "OpenSolaris" in the
name that unnerves me. It puts this distribution in a special
position that no other distribution holds. If that special place
doesn't wield influence over the others, then what's the point? If it
does, then do we understand what we're asking for?
In my mind, the real question
is... do you prefer the Fedora or Debian model?
Actually neither. ;-}
I suspect this debate boils down to "What is the base level of
compatibility that the openSolaris 'Brand' should denote such that
Applications are portable between the various implementations. I think
this boils down to:
A. Define a "Reserved ABI" thats all distros have to adhere to.
B. Define the core applications that make up the "Base system"
C. Define filesystem organisation to a level where applications are able
to find other components between the distros
The Reference Platform would then be defined as one that emulates this
as closely as possible without adding extra features that could
inadvertently differentiate the reference plaqtform from a given distro.
Oh BTW this would probably imply that all distros would have to (For
example) carry a functional SysV packaging system, but this doesn't
preclude a particular distro using another in addition to this. The
distro is still compatible at the base (defined) level
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
