Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Apr 2009 11:53 UTC, submitted by tsedlmeyer
We've been debating the merits of a possible IBM-Sun deal for a while now, and even Sun itself seemed to be in the dark as to if it would be a good idea to be bought by IBM. These debates are now all moot: in a surprise move (at least, I didn't see any speculation about it) Oracle has bought Sun Microsystems, at USD 9.50 a share, which equates to a total of 7.4 billion USD. The news got out through a press release.
Thread beginning with comment 359624
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[10]: good for solaris
by akrosdbay on Tue 21st Apr 2009 01:29
in reply to "RE[9]: good for solaris "
Member since:2008-06-09
Yep, nowhere. Is there a repository for *everything* that people from Nexenta and elsewhere can commit to without signing away their children?
Where is a such a respository for GNU/Linux. Point me to where on kernel.org or anywhere there is a "repository" that all the other distros pull from and integrate too.
Didn't think so. If you can't shut your trap about your stupid defintion of Open Source..
RE[11]: good for solaris
by segedunum on Tue 21st Apr 2009 10:03
in reply to "RE[10]: good for solaris "
Member since:2005-07-06
Where is a such a respository for GNU/Linux. Point me to where on kernel.org or anywhere there is a "repository" that all the other distros pull from and integrate too.
You've got to be kidding me?! Seriously............
You can pull code from all the projects that make up a 'Linux system' (kernel, userspace, whatever), bootstrap and roll your own distro or you can pull code from the many distributors out there who have repositories for their own development. The point is, you can fork any Linux distro in umpteen different ways but you can't do that with Solaris. The freedom of the source code is everything.
If you can't shut your trap about your stupid defintion of Open Source..
You're obviously upset that OpenSolaris isn't what you thought it was, but I'm not. If Sun want to do what they're doing then that is absolutely fine and I don't have a problem with it at all, but pretending that they have something that is 'open source' with an OpenSolaris 'community' directing things is disingenuous and wide of the mark.
The basic acid test for an open source project is if people can create workable forks and work with the code 100% on a level playing field. In OpenSolaris's case that means external people working on a level playing field with Sun, committing to the same repository and building a working Solaris system in the same way from source code with no intervention. Trademark and other issues can come into it, but that's the acid test and OpenSolaris fails it. I don't think Sun ever intended to have that, but they didn't make it clear.
I really don't have a problem with what Sun has done with OpenSolaris at all but let's just admit it, let's not pretend, let's not get all upset and let's not get pissy about redefining what 'open source' projects are when the reality has been pointed out.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Yep, nowhere. Is there a repository for *everything* that people from Nexenta and elsewhere can commit to without signing away their children? As Ted Tso once said, Linus gets more contributions brushing his teeth than this approach will get in a week.
Like I said, where's the repository? Maybe I didn't make it clear what is meant by that in the open source world, but I figured people would be clever enough to know. Creating a Mercurial or a Git repository and accepting patches is not rocket science, but Sun won't do it.
Ahhhh, Project Nevada eh? Sun's blessed distribution that masquerades as OpenSolaris?
Yer. Read it ;-).
That's because they have to build off the back of Nevada, which is Sun's blessed and controlled 'OpenSolaris' distribution. They're not building off the back of a free and open Indiana, which confusingly, was supposed to be OpenSolaris but became Sun's pet offshoot. It's confusing as hell. The notion that somehow you can pull the source down and build an independent and competing distribution without it is bollocks. As Roy Fielding found out, you can't even call OpenSolaris anything else: ;-)
http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/watching-the-ripples
If people are happy with that then fine, but it's not an open source community we all know and have seen and pretending it is is just plain sad. I gave up looking at it a while ago. It's dead until Sun gives up control.
Seriously, you don't have to look far:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/get/
AKA, Nevada, unless they've changed again. No cookies for you. I wouldn't have a problem with this, but people try and pretend it is something it isn't and that I do have a problem with.
I do wish people would understand what FUD stands for and means rather than throwing it around in conversations as a reply to things they don't like. It would help if you read first.
Edited 2009-04-21 01:05 UTC