[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: supporting closed source operating systems?

seth vidal wrote:
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 12:48 -0700, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 19:30 +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:

I think this is a rephrasing of Jeff's brigth line that he seeks to
draw and wants to know what it will include and what not.
Thanks for this post, for me it did a good job of separating the
technical from $other considerations.

The Fedora brand is a Linux brand.  It makes sense to have some
Microsoft Windows stuff where it supports that story, such as tools to
assist migration ... to Linux.  The libvirt pieces seem, to me, to be a
good enough fit and belong on this side of the bright line.

But we need to make it clear that we are not going to morph Fedora into
being some super-meta-FLOSS thing.  So, to me, the productivity apps
belong on the other side of the bright line.  If we want to be involved
in helping people switch from Microsoft Windows by supporting
productivity FLOSS stacks that runs on that OS, it should be under a
brand other than Fedora.  Such as "Mozilla". ;-D

Thanks Karsten. I agree with the above.


Agreed also. Well said.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]