Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 21:22:42 +0100 From: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> Cc: Doug Barton <Doug@gorean.org>, Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Correction of typo Message-ID: <v0422080db4f2fcf31ffa@[195.238.24.123]> In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20000313123947.041d46c0@localhost> References: <4.2.2.20000313112734.041d5670@localhost> <4.2.2.20000313123947.041d46c0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 12:50 PM -0700 2000/3/13, Brett Glass wrote: > The precompiled packages are not products of the FreeBSD Project. > They consist of works such as Apache, etc. which are generated > completely independently and over whose development and quality > the Project exercises no control. Just like a third-party installer > would. cd /usr/ports; make install; make cd-image-for-ports I'd say that this is about as FreeBSD-specific as you can get. And considering that FreeBSD-specific patches are frequently applied for the ports subsystem, the output from this could be construed to be a FreeBSD product. However, other than providing best-effort-let-us-know-if-it-breaks support, this is as far as FreeBSD goes with these third-party programs. > Again, suppose they included a third party installer. Or maybe TWO > third party installers, for that matter, so you could take your choice. > Why would bugs in these be any more harmful to FreeBSD's reputation > than bugs in any other third party product included on the discs? Put them in /usr/ports, and no one will complain to Jordan (as Release Engineer for FreeBSD) if they break. However, if you want to get them incorporated into the base part of the OS, you're going to have a bit more work to do. If you're willing to do that work, and the result is a better installer than we have today, then GREAT!!! If you want to hold that work off for yourself and produce something based on FreeBSD but with your custom version of the installer, you're free to do that and call it whatever you want -- so long as you don't use the name "FreeBSD". > The current situation is that only Walnut Creek can safely use the mark > at all. Even CheapBytes is going out on a limb. Instead of bitching and moaning about problems that are likely to be non-existant, why don't you do something novel for a change, and actually contact Jordan (or other members of the FreeBSD Core Team) to see what the exact terms of the use of the Trademark are? Otherwise, you're wasting your time, mine, Matt's, Doug's, Paul's, and that of every single other person on this list. -- These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy ====================================================================== Brad Knowles, <blk@skynet.be> || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124 Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels http://www.skynet.be || Belgium To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v0422080db4f2fcf31ffa>