Originally posted by Dubhthach
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Oracle Still To Make OpenSolaris Changes
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostWrong. Sometimes it is helpful to check claims with links before posting? Solaris took ZFS from OpenSolaris.
Well I know people disagreeing with you. They think lots of cool features are added very fast into OpenSolaris: ZFS, DTrace, etc
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by kraftman View PostSome of this exist since years. OpenSolaris only took them from Solaris.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostWe've got probably different point of view when comes to rapid development.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostI'm not talking about copying features from Solaris, but about developing new.
Originally posted by kraftman View PostI'm not even saying OpenSolaris is in stagnation, but I wonder if it's being developed so rapidly.
Originally posted by LinuxID10T View PostSolaris 10 was released years ago, but if you mean the latest version of Solaris 10, I could understand from Sun's (now Oracle's) point of view. I am sorry, but not having a new release ready before the old one's end of general availability is stagnation. I am not saying that the features going into OpenSolaris are stagnating, but just the distribution is not updated enough with new releases.
Regarding rest of your post, I dont really understand? It seems that you believe that Solaris 10 is released far to seldom? There are too many years between Solaris releases?
S10 is developed slow, not OpenSolaris. Solaris versions have traditionally had long release cycles, several years. Solaris is Enterpries, where you dont change things rapidly, stability is the most important. Some OpenVMS machines have uptime of 17 years. That is Enterprise. I have never heard of 17 years uptimes for Solaris, but I have heard of Solaris uptimes of many years.
Solaris are well tested and stable. Such Enterprise Unix has long cycles, many years. To rapidly upgrade Enterprise Unixes is traditionally not viewed as positive. You can not force your customers to upgrade each year (like windows does). The support cycles are very long, you just dont discontinue a release after a few years (like Windows does). Solaris 10 will be supported for many years to come.
Stable code and new funtionalit works against each other. Only old well tested code is stable. New code is always buggy. If you rewrite lots of code all the time, it will be unstable. It is said that Windows requires at leat SP1 before being usable.
Compare Playstation and Xbox, where PS2 is still supported and games are released today, 10 years after. Compare to Xbox 1, which was discontinued in 2006, after only 5 years. A short life span is negative, when you talk about Enterprise customers.
Or did I misunderstood you?
Leave a comment:
-
Addition clearification
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostWell, officially, the target is 6 month release cycle. Sun did slip on it once, but that was because Soalris 10 was also released, so Sun prioritized S10, which is understandable.
Anyway, I dont see the point of making fuss if the release cycle slips once or twice. I know there are lots of people saying that OpenSolaris adds more cool features faster, than other OSes. I doubt they think development has stagnated. But you are free to disagree.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostNo? I dont agree. If OpenSolaris adds much more cool features such as ZFS, DTrace, Crossbow, SMF, etc etc than other OSes, then at least I would say that development is rapid.
I doubt anyone would say that development of for instance, ZFS for OpenSolaris is "stagnated". Just recently ZFS allows Deduplication on OpenSolaris.
There are lots of other cool features added very fast, much more faster than other OSes. That is not "stagnation", just because one release slipped a couple of months? But you are free to disagree.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by kraftman View PostThis says nothing if development is rapid or not.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LinuxID10T View PostIt is not a six month release cycle, it is an eight month one, and is a month over at that. The problem with the eight month release cycle is that major packages, such as Firefox, are one or two releases behind. Stagnation. It also lands at a different time of year each release. Distributions that are released with shorter release cycles get more attention. Plus, I am talking about actual releases not dev builds.
Anyway, I dont see the point of making fuss if the release cycle slips once or twice. I know there are lots of people saying that OpenSolaris adds more cool features faster, than other OSes. I doubt they think development has stagnated. But you are free to disagree.
Leave a comment:
-
Clearification
Originally posted by kebabbert View PostI dont understand what you mean? Could you clarify?
OpenSolaris builds are released every two weeks. Every 6 months, the current OpenSolaris build is tested and then released as "2008.11" or "2009.06" or "2010.03", etc. Maybe you didnt knew that?
And I doubt someone knowledgable would say that OpenSolaris development stagnates. The development is extremely rapid: Crossbow, ZFS deduplication, Comstar, etc
Leave a comment:
-
Not sure correct things are being put together here
I actually doubt end of SXCE is related to Oracle. To me the reasons seems to be technical in nature: <http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/...+on/ON+IPS+FAQ>. Once that happens SXCE is impossible as some critical packages are no longer available in the correct format for that.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: