[OpenIndiana-discuss] Proposal: OpenIndiana Stable Branch

[Alasdair Lumsden]

Hi Deano,

Thanks for your feedback - I appreciate you taking the time to write a big reply.

On 15 Jan 2011, at 01:20, Deano wrote:

> Hi,
> Sounds like an good move, however I don't think that you mentioned or
> proposed how we tackle one issue of taking OI into production server (which
> is possible, I go live with 3 OI servers on Monday <gulp> ;) ).

Good luck! I can report it works really well :-)

> Currently the dependency chain of the packages, is erm to be polite utterly
> broken... Before we can consider a stable build, we have to fix that a text
> install takes 2.6GiB and includes so much stuff that doesn't belong. Trying
> to remove via pkg gets you nowhere as it horrible chained together
> incorrectly. It's a security nightmare, the only way I currently feel safe
> is that I have a zone that faces the world because zones (for some reason)
> install much more striped down installs.

Unfortunately this is something we have inherited from Oracle. Some of the packages need to be split, so that they don't pull in such a large tree of dependencies. Some packages (Things like python) also have dependencies on things like the gnome libraries or X11 libraries - if the packages were split then this could improve the situation.

It needs someone to actually sit down and work out the dependency tree and take charge of that project. Perhaps you'd be willing to help work on this?

> IMHO First thing should be making a minimal server install, debootstrap
> minimal. Get a unix base system, IPS package manager and wget and the rest
> can come later. TBH the install a new zone gets is more like the default
> install should be imho.

Ironically, minimising and stripping back the operating system is much harder than building the whole thing. The more we diverge from the userland that Oracle provides, the more work we have to do for every release.

I do agree with you - the text installer is too fat and the package set for a fresh zone is much better.

Potentially there could be some big wins had by splitting packages like Python up, and then the text installer distro-constructor manifest could be paired back.

If this is something you want - i'd encourage you to hop onto #oi-dev on irc.freenode.net and get involved.

> Then have a number of repositories with different classes of supported apps,
> Primary being your list and with critical fixes etc. and then secondary
> being less supported apps.
> Your proposal to focus on a small set of apps is correct imho, new users to
> OI stable will be early adopters almost by definition, so by being honest
> and saying OS is stable and great and so are these major programs, but not
> everything out there is to the same level, we encourage champions to take
> their favorite program and get it on the major supported list.

Absolutely - it does seem like if you have a small supported software list, and some people want their favourite app supported, then we stand a greater chance of them joining the project to maintain it.

So I'm hopeful this approach will attract more contributors.

> Also a smaller core will make the illumos switch faster, I'm personally not
> sure if stable should become before illumos integration. OI on illumos works
> now, with locales being the major issues (being worked on), it doesn't feel
> right to call OI stable without it using (even a WIP) the base that it
> requires going forward (OI on ON isn't really stable as it's a EOL, which
> implies an unstable future).

As I mentioned above, ironically a smaller core would take much more time than just bashing on and integrating Illumos.

> As you're worried about missing the window, as OSol users migrate to linux
> or FreeBSD IMHO that is more a perception issue. OI website appears very
> slow moving, even dead. Bringing some life there may help that issue, call
> the WIP stable build, Early Adopter build or something like that, post EA
> new builds once a week on the front page. Get silly screen shots of shell
> doing zfs, or apache configuration files, all completely useless BUT
> highlights that look this thing is real and running apps you, as a IT geek
> are wanting to run...

I also agree - the OI Website needs work. I intend to do some today. I'm no web developer though.


> As a production OI deployer, I really care about 
> 1) Minimal install with just the programs I want, 

*nod* - sticking stuff in Zones makes a lot of sense for this.

> 2) Critical fixes for the OS and those apps if I use the package system.
> 3) A safe build environment, as there is a fair chance I'll be building app
> myself at this stage (I use a separate machine for this as the safest way :)
> )

Again, Zones.

> 4) Something that will upgrade nicely for the say 3 years. For OI that
> scream illumos IMHO

While we're only proposing to support our stable branch for 6 months, the idea is that you'll be able to then upgrade to our next stable release, which will be Illumos based.


> 5) A community with nice central info pool, currently the OI wiki and
> webpages doesn't feel like a community, wiki access is restricted, so not
> encouraging writing up notes and most of the useful information  isn't on
> there anyway. Half the time you end up on Oracle web pages, which makes you
> wonder if this is a real OS.

The wiki access situation does need to be addressed. It's restricted by default because the content there is super important for those building the OS.

We could do with a proposal for what to do about the wiki - if we allow anyone to sign up we risk it being edited in ways that the project leads don't necessarily want.

And yes all the links in the OS to Sun/Oracle need to be fixed. Perhaps someone is willing to work on this?

> 6) Security info and concerns, from articles to hardening the OS to using
> VMs (Xen, Zones, Virtual box?) to isolate components. Probably just an
> extension of the wiki and/or blogs but I'm sure some of the in the trenches
> guys would be happy to write a few articles on how we got OI onto the front
> line and in use.

The OpenIndiana Handbook would be a great place for this information:

http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/OpenIndiana+Handbook

If you'd like access to the wiki to work on this just say.

> Hope this doesn't sound negative, as mostly I agree with your proposal (only
> thing I really disagree on is non illumos). At the moment OI is very much a
> shadow of OSol choices, which I don't think apply here, for it to go stable
> it needs to shake of its old masters clothes and choose its own route. 
> Starting with a small server distro that just happens to have a huge repo of
> other apps including desktop, allows it to find a niche and then expand out
> from there. As a server (especially a storage server) OS imho its second to
> none :)

It doesn't sound negative, there are valid concerns which do need to be addressed. I'd very much like to talk to anyone reading this who wishes to help address any of the concerns above. Most of it will happen, its just a matter of when - It's a manpower thing. The more people contributing, the faster it will all happen.

Thanks,

Alasdair