Re: Debian trademark [was: Debian GNU/w32, may ready to be started?]
I'm not sure I made my point very clearly. I'll try again.
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 05:37:10PM -0500, Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> was heard to say:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 03:43:09PM -0500, Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> was heard to say:
> > We make no restriction that Debian GNU/Linux packages can not be installed
> > on a Sun OS, do we? Why should we have anything to say about packages
> > installable on M$?
(note that I'm assuming Dale meant "officially support and maintain
SunOS packages" above. No-one that I've seen has suggested that we
should somehow require users to not compile our packages on That
Operating System)
> We also don't use our resources to compile and distribute binary
> packages for Solaris, or put our name behind an effort to do so. Why
> should we do anything different for Windows?
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 11:55:29PM +0100, Peter Makholm <peter@makholm.net> was heard to say:
> When has we rejected to put our name behind an effort to distribute
> binary packages for Solaris like you suggesting we should do with
> Windows?
>
> I know that dpkg has been ported/compiled on a couple of closed source
> unices but a porting project of Debian as a whole I don't remember
> been discussed to the extend you seems to suggesting.
Yes, and therefore it's meaningless to say that because we do not
refuse to (officially) support "Debian/SunOS", we should not refuse to
support "Debian/Windows".
Daniel
--
/-------------------- Daniel Burrows <dburrows@brown.edu> --------------------\
| Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my hard drive? |
\---- Be like the kid in the movie! Play chess! -- http://www.uschess.org ---/
Reply to: