[oi-dev] [discuss] Re: basis for better collaboration on illumos and OpenIndiana: small circle, Big circle

[Jonathan Adams]

"I don't know how to do it myself, but I'm sure that a list of my minimum
criteria would be good for the whole ecosystem.

will you please implement these changes and get back to me asap.

Thanks

PS. can we have a new logo and pie charts? ;-P"

http://www.27bslash6.com/p2p2.html



On 20 February 2014 13:30, Ray Arachelian <ray at arachelian.com> wrote:

> On 02/19/2014 10:34 PM, seth Nimbosa wrote:
> > The reason we need a minimum of criteria for collaboration is
> > precisely because the different distributions have different focus,
> > approach, and use case scenarios in mind, but a set of core features
> > that will make it to a unified kernel will be for everyone's benefit.
> > Additional layers will be built upon this basic core and the
> > abstraction of these feature-sets and their encapsulation from the
> > layers below and above it will ensure that there is more or less a
> > predictable and uniform way each of these layers interact together and
> > how they behave on top of the core.  I mean each distro-specific
> > feature-set will be spun out and encapsulated into separate layers of
> > development on top of the kernel (and these layers will be slightly or
> > wildly different in each distribution) but the core will remain mainly
> > intact but dynamically developed jointly by the different distros in
> > an upstream manner.
>
> Indeed.  That was the whole point of Illumos.org - it wasn't meant to be
> an end-user distro, but rather the canonical source repository for what
> once was opensolaris, to be used by the various end-user and commercial
> distros, until such time as (either hell froze over or) Oracle released
> the sources for Solaris 11, and it would accept upstream changes from
> the various distros where appropriate.  Sadly it looks like the former
> is more likely.
>
> So ideally, illumos.org is where kernel updates should be sent to.  From
> the looks of it, ZFS is still being updated, as is d-trace, and various
> other parts, so there is activity, but it's nowhere near the scale of
> linux, or even the BSDs.
>
> It might be helpful to have some sort of ABI that allows opensolaris to
> steal linux device drivers, or FreeBSD device drivers, either by
> recompiling, or by providing a binary interface, but I've no idea how
> difficult that would be.  Such an interface would allow quick porting of
> missing device drivers, at a cost of poor efficiency due to the extra
> layers, but at least it would provide some support for hardware that
> isn't supported yet.  Timing sensitive device drivers wouldn't work very
> well with such a scheme.  (And of course there's tons of license
> compatibility issues there to ameliorate.)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev at openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/attachments/20140220/7b388bdd/attachment-0005.html>