Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 04:02:20 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: Richard Hodges <rh@matriplex.com> Cc: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, wes@softweyr.com, brian@Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Mall now BSDCentral Message-ID: <200107080302.f6832Kn42932@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Richard Hodges <rh@matriplex.com> of "Sat, 07 Jul 2001 15:51:51 PDT." <Pine.BSF.4.10.10107071542110.13080-100000@mail.matriplex.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Brian Somers wrote:
>
> > Richard Hodges <rh@matriplex.com> wrote:
> > > And as far as distribution goes, if my vote counts, I would suggest
> > > that anyone should have the right to sell (or give away) copies for
> > > whatever price they want. The more copies, the better! I fail to
> > > see why FreeBSD distribution should be "guided" to certain entities
> > > based on their political contributions.
>
> > FSL have thought quite a bit about this -- what's acceptable as a
> > FreeBSD release. We need some sort of balance. On one hand, we (the
> > FreeBSD project) want to encourage distributors to produce copies of
> > FreeBSD with added-value. On the other hand, we don't want to end up
> > with the linux-effect.
>
> Really? I was hoping to see a new disto with the FreeBSD userland
> wrapped around a Linux kernel :-) Or was it the other way around...
>
> But as far as "added-value" goes, why wouldn't minimum cost be an
> added value to a potential customer? I think that the companies
> like Cheapbytes serve a social purpose in this regard.
I'm not having a go at Cheapbytes. I'm just saying that their CDs
should be labeled official or unofficial based on their content. If
they want to drop the base ISO image onto a CD and sell it, then
they're as official as anybody else.
> > So I think the idea of an ``official'' distribution is good, but only
> > insofar as that implies that the distribution contains a specific
> > base system. Anyone who mucks about with that official base system
> > in a way that's not controlled by the user should not be allowed to
> > call their distribution ``official''.
>
> Sure, no argument there. Taking Wes' suggestion, maybe there is an
> opportunity in the "official" distribution distinction. How about a
> "certificate of authenticity" which costs the vendors $1 or $2 (or
> whatever), and shows the customer that their choice of vendors helped
> FreeBSD financially. Incidentally, this certificate might also be a
> selling point for those twisted individuals that just don't understand
> free software :-)
Companies that sell CDs shouldn't necessarily be limited in the ways
that they can give back to the project. If a company (WRS for
example) are forking out lots of money to the FreeBSD project
already, why should they have to now send money to the foundation ?
Besides, our software is free, it's not shareware.
> Thanks for the info,
>
> -Richard
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Richard Hodges | Matriplex, inc.
> Product Manager | 769 Basque Way
> rh@matriplex.com | Carson City, NV 89706
> 775-886-6477 | www.matriplex.com
--
Brian <brian@freebsd-services.com> <brian@Awfulhak.org>
http://www.freebsd-services.com/ <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200107080302.f6832Kn42932>