Re: Commercial .debs

To: debian-policy@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Commercial .debs
From: john@dhh.gt.org
Date: 26 Nov 1998 14:15:29 -0600
Message-id: <[🔎] 871zmq1a8u.fsf@hasler.dhh>
In-reply-to: "Marcelo E. Magallon"'s message of "Thu, 26 Nov 1998 11:21:38 -0600"
References: <[🔎] 199811252127.VAA10624@linda.lfix.co.uk> <[🔎] 365C8E7B.1D551B7B@ntc.nokia.com> <[🔎] 8790gzqpi8.fsf@hasler.dhh> <[🔎] 19981126112138.A26503@efis.ucr.ac.cr>

I wrote:
> Please choose something other than SPI.  How about Debian?

Marcelo E. Magallon writes:
> Why not SPI?

Because SPI asserts that is not a Debian specific organization, and because
there is no reason to expect that people not intimately familiar with
Debian will recognize 'SPI' as meaning that the package was produced by
Debian.

I repeat: Why not Debian?  Why should the origin field in a deb that
originated with Debian not say 'Origin: debian'?
-- 
John Hasler                This posting is in the public domain.
john@dhh.gt.org		   Do with it what you will.
Dancing Horse Hill         Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood, Wisconsin         Do not send email advertisements to this address.

Reply to:

References:
- Commercial .debs
  - From: "Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk>
- Re: Commercial .debs
  - From: Arto Astala <arto.astala@ntc.nokia.com>
- Re: Commercial .debs
  - From: john@dhh.gt.org
- Re: Commercial .debs
  - From: "Marcelo E. Magallon" <mmagallo@efis.ucr.ac.cr>

Prev by Date: Bug#29955: marked as done (policy versions aren't parallel with packaging-manual)
Next by Date: Bug#30036: debian-policy could include emacs policy
Previous by thread: Re: Commercial .debs
Next by thread: Re: Commercial .debs
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread