Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 19:55:02 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: netmonger@genesis.ispace.com (Drew Baxter) Cc: grog@lemis.com, tlambert@primenet.com, jcwells@u.washington.edu, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD certified software (was: WordPerfect 8 for Linux) Message-ID: <199811011955.MAA24027@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <4.1.19981030212143.00a84420@genesis.ispace.com> from "Drew Baxter" at Oct 30, 98 09:22:18 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> I would like to see three categories: > >> > >> o Can be made to run with effort > >> o Install tools, but non-native binaries > >> o Native binaries. > > > >You're late on the scene, Terry. This is exactly what I suggested > >several days ago. Not quite exactly what you suggested... I think I've drawn a harder line on the limits of marketing implied by the first item. > >I think that others have made a valid point, though: if we include the > >first category, we don't give much incentive for them to take the > >relatively small step to the second category. I think we should refer > >to the first category in an also-ran web page, but not issue > >certificates unless they go at least to the second category. > > That makes sense. It's not like it's going to kill anyone to throw > together some install tools. After all, it's a good plug for their product > as well to have support for FreeBSD.. The install tools should be thrown together *by* FreeBSD people, and *given* to the vendor, for non-native binaries. Branding at all should *require* a FreeBSD "install presence". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199811011955.MAA24027>