From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Oct 27 18:42:51 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA07930 for freebsd-advocacy-outgoing; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:42:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ime.net (ime.net [209.90.192.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA07921 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:42:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from netmonger@genesis.ispace.com) Received: from Celeris (56k-port4019.ime.net [209.90.195.29]) by ime.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA29015; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:41:17 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.1.19981027213218.00a704a0@genesis.ispace.com> X-Sender: netmonger@genesis.ispace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:37:15 -0500 To: Licia From: Drew Baxter Subject: Re: FreeBSD certified software (was: WordPerfect 8 for Linux) Cc: Wes Peters , Greg Lehey , Terry Lambert , kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: References: <36367CE6.BFF12693@softweyr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG [Clipped the crap out of this.. At 08:32 PM 10/27/98 -0600, you wrote: > >I think the initial idea itself is a good one. It seems like an important >first step towards encouraging and even validating applications developers >who support or specialize in FreeBSD. > It would also plug support in a lot of ways. Especially people saying "oh it works on FreeBSD, what's that?" and people would go look. All in all, I think it's a very sound idea and should be implemented. >An interesting thought, how will verification of such things be accomplished? >For example, I'm developing a spam filter called Bouncer. It's a TCP daemon >that stands on port 25, handling all connections, passing acceptable data >through to any existing MTA (like sendmail) that supports a stdio smtp/esmtp >mode. It offers several policy mechanisms for dealing with possible spam >as well as ip/hostname banning for several places in the email header. I'm >writing it specifically for use under FreeBSD. Right now the only available >version is an early alpha binary.(fully functional, about 90% feature-complete) >If I were to apply for this certification for Bouncer, what criteria would I >need to meet? Would I need to provide source? Would I need to provide a >fully configured system? Would I simply need to give you my word that it's >there and that it works? What sort of procedure do you envision for >certification of this type of situation? (if source is required, I could >not submit it until Beta, as that is when I will release the source) That's a good question.. I'd imagine certification would be if the program runs on a variety of differing machines. If it's 'made in/on/for' FreeBSD, I'd imagine it'd be 'Designed For FreeBSD'.. Does anyone know how Microsoft does their certification? Maybe R&D goes "It works under Windows 95" and just puts the sticker on it. > >> >> The second, "Works with FreeBSD," is for software that runs on FreeBSD >> under emulation, and/or hardware that is known to work well with FreeBSD. >> Say, for instance, I've made several workstations with a particular >> motherboard from XYZ Corp., and have found it easy to configure and use. >> I write up a description of the system's I've built, which XYZ Corp >> motherboard(s) I've used, and submit this to the "Works" page. It's >> filed, and the company is awared the "Works" logo. >> >> Same deal for software under emulation. Linux apps, SCO apps, BSDI apps, >> etc. A good example of this is the Acrobat Reader binary I have installed >> on my workstation; it's a Linux binary installed with a port kit. Whoever >> undertakes to do the testing would make notes on what is required to get >> it to work, i.e. "needs Linux emulation pre-installed; at step 4 in the >> included installation process, stop and 'brandelf /usr/local/bin/Xword'" >> or something of the sort. If the person doing the testing wants to create >> a 'port' that will install the product and offer it to the company, or >> just post it on FreeBSD servers; so much the better. >> > >Would this be extended to things such as dos applications useable via doscmd, >windows applications useable in wine, and the various other emulators (such >as amiga, mac, commodore 64, etc)? or would it require that the emulation be >one of those included in a common base line installation? > >> > Would companies be allowed to use the certification in advertisements? >> >> I certainly hope they do! Ideally, we'd want them to put the logo on their >> web pages for the branded product(s), pointing to the FreeBSD web pages >> talking about the testing and support of the product. We'd also want them >> to stick stickers on the box, or on the hardware itself. Yeah, I'd like to >> see a little "Designed for FreeBSD" sticker on the back (or front!) of the >> Whistle InterJet and Pluto SPACE Platform. >> > >What would be the restrictions on such usage? > >> > Would related logos be available, to the effect of "We support the FreeBSD >> > Certification Effort"? >> >> I think the above two pretty much cover it. We're calling more attention >> to those who really work with us, and offering to do the testing, etc., >> work for the "Works with" products. > >What sort of structure, organization, and procedures do you see as needed >to bring this to a strong level of validity and professionalism? > >[ licia@o-o.org ] [ http://www.o-o.org/ ] [ IrcNick : Licia ] >[ A happy user of FreeBSD : http://www.freebsd.org/ ] >[ Why crawl through windows when you can walk through a door? ] >[ This user boycotts all Microsoft products and services ] > --- Drew "Droobie" Baxter Network Admin/Professional Computer Nerd(TM) OneEX: The OneNetwork Exchange 207-942-0275 http://www.droo.orland.me.us My Latest Kernel: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT (ONEEX) #14: Mon Oct 19 22:36:58 EDT 1998 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message