AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@lsi.com
RQ:
SSV:mhbs.lsil.com
NSV:
SSH:
R:<Bruce.Edge@lsi.com>
MAID:2
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/LSI/INBOX	0	4ACE1496.7040308@lsi.com
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 11:57:46 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com>
To: "Edge, Bruce" <Bruce.Edge@lsi.com>
Subject: Re: Linux Decision point needed
Message-ID: <20091008115746.4a77953c@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <4ACE1496.7040308@lsi.com>
References: <F9DCB1C30AC37B4EB352D0DE0AE18E5F97D29562@cosmail02.lsi.com>
	<20091007135800.1c1ea7c1@ripper.onstor.net>
	<4ACE1496.7040308@lsi.com>
Organization: LSI
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm afraid I've just run out of bandwidth to deal with this right now.
Suffice it to say I'll go with whatever you decide because you have a
clue and the rest are just talking monkeys.  Oops, did I just say that
out loud?

On the subject, I don't think the QA of XenServer is worth 10cents
compared to the countless deployments of Debian et-al/xen kernel
patches from Novell.  The QA probably does more to shore up
infelicities in Centos than anything else.  We can just avoid all those
by going with a debian variant, as you are all ready clued into ~:^)

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:34:30 -0600 "Edge, Bruce" <Bruce.Edge@lsi.com>
wrote:

> Hey, are you joining the selection meeting now?
>=20
> On 10/07/2009 01:58 PM, Andrew Sharp wrote:
>=20
> Hi Bruce,
>=20
> To the best of my knowledge, I would say that you and I are the
> primary drivers of this at the moment, and I think it's also safe to
> say that we agree on Debian, which is what I would prefer.  However,
> if you think you have a need to go with Ubuntu instead, I can abide
> by that too.  I think you should just make that call.  Then you and I
> can say "here's the proposed decision. if you disagree, you have 10
> seconds to send an email, otherwise it's done." And then we can skip
> another @%$*#! conference call.  I kid about the 10 seconds, just in
> case you can't tell from the tone of my font ~:^)
>=20
> Thoughts?
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 14:36:09 -0600 "Rolandelli, Craig"
> <Craig.Rolandelli@lsi.com><mailto:Craig.Rolandelli@lsi.com> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>=20
> When: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:30 AM-10:00 AM (GMT-08:00) Pacific
> Time (US & Canada). Where: 866-214-7945
> (US)/0008006103111(India)702-696-4029 (International), 408-433-7253
>=20
> Note: The GMT offset above does not reflect daylight saving time
> adjustments.
>=20
> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
>=20
> Attached is an email Chuck sent out about finalizing the Linux
> decision.
>=20
> I wanted to get us all on the phone and drive this issue to closure.
> It shouldn=E2=80=99t take more than 30 minutes as I believe Chuck has done
> 99% of the work to get us to a decision point.  I just want a nod
> from everyone that they agree and a distribution version number.
>=20
> I know folks are leery of making a decision because Linux changes by
> the hour.  We aren=E2=80=99t going to state a version and stick with it. =
We
> are going to write the SOW statement that this is the minimum level
> needed and that we fully anticipate moving forward with Linux
> releases until we enter acceptance testing.   But I need a minimum
> starting point for Citrix and our boxcars.
>=20
> Craig
>=20
>=20
>=20
