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

Re: Fedora Project, give me 20 Million Euros or Free EDA software

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Cry <cry_regarder yahoo com> wrote:
> Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh.goorah <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> The subject of this email is "Fedora Project, give me 20 Million Euros
>> or Free Software" ! Unfortunately, I'm not kidding and even 20 Million
>> Euros is not enough.
> Fedora isn't a "if its free stick it in" repository.  It isn't the old sunsite.
> Fedora is for linux (and I guess windows now) software and data that software
> can use.  There isn't anything that can use OVM so why bundle it into fedora?

It's somewhat more subtle than that I think as OVM breaks some
established concepts about what is code and what is content. OVM is a
library. the OVM stuff sure looks like code to me. The readme even
talks about compiling it. It's code of some sort.  The problem is we
don't have a compiler or interpreter that can process the
instructions.  In the context of Fedora its code that can't be used.

Related questions which I think go to the heart of the matter are these.
Would we allow any c# code into Fedora if the open mono interpreter
wasn't available as part of Fedora?  I don't think we would.

Did we allow any java code into Fedora before there was an open java
interpreter?  I'm pretty sure we didn't...and if some slipped in it
was not intentional.

Before gdl was in Fedora would you let me ship the piles and piles of
open source scientific oriented IDL scripts that I have just sitting
around collecting dust if there was no intepreter for it in Fedora?
I'm pretty sure that would have not been allowed either.

OVM isn't new ground, its just different ground.


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