No, to all of those things. None of our objections are with any of your points; in fact all your points are valid and true - and all the engineering, and marketing teams involved in Indiana should be applauded for their efforts.
Our *only* point of contention is that your announcement of Indiana, and the naming of Indiana as OpenSolaris implies the community has endorsed Indiana as the one true binary distribution of OpenSolaris, and that is in fact - not true. So here's my point: Does it matter if a "community-developed" (Indiana's words, not mine) distribution uses the community's name and blessing when in fact the community hasn't given it? I think it does. Hope that helps clarify the point of contention. cheers, steve Ian Murdock wrote: > All right. > > I don't even know where to begin. > > Does it matter at all that the feedback outside this community to > the idea that we're producing a binary distribution called > OpenSolaris has almost universally been: "Duh. What took so long?" > > Does it matter that the initial feedback on the Developer Preview > has been overwhelming positive, that so many more people in the > world are talking about OpenSolaris--that the approach is WORKING? > > Does it matter that we literally MOVED MOUNTAINS to get to where we > are today.. To create this community in the first place, to free the IP, > to reprioritize, to get the vast resources Sun dedicates to Solaris > focused on doing their work in the open, to evangelize within the > company the importance of continuing to open up such that those outside > of Sun can participate in future development on an equal footing? > > Does it matter that we are inviting the community to participate > in a discussion about how to enable broader use of the OpenSolaris > brand, to build out a ecosystem of distributions that are compatible, > to solve the Linux fragmentation problem before it even becomes > a problem? What other company has done this? Shouldn't we be applauded > for being willing to take this step--or is this just another > case of Sun being held to a much different standard than everyone else? > > And, yes, does it matter that Sun holds a large stake in this > community, PAYS the vast majority of people here for the privilege of > being able to spend their days doing what they love, gets flamed > repeatedly by many of those same people for our trouble, and in return > thinks it reasonable to have _some_ say in how the community functions? > Or is that a sign of evil intentions? Do we have to completely > abdicate to "be community"? Isn't that taxation without representation? > > Or is all that insignificant, irrelevant? We haven't given everything, > so therefore we've given nothing? > > I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. Not in the least bit. > > -ian > -- stephen lau | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.whacked.net _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
