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

Re: New comps.xml group for Windows cross-compiler



I wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>     <_name>Windows cross-compiler</_name>
> 
> Why not be specific and say MinGW cross compiler or MinGW32 cross
> compiler?

PS: I think using "Windows" that way can also get us in trademark trouble.
We'd have to say "Cross-compiler targeting Microsoft Windows" or something
equally stupid. Now of course using "Winblow$" or something like that
instead could avoid us the trademark lawsuit, but then RH Legal will freak
out about "disparaging". ;-) So I think "MinGW cross compiler" is the best
solution to keep the name short, and then description can cite the
trademarks in a way which is clearly fair use.

What do you think?

        Kevin Kofler


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