On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote: > >Ok, I didn't know that - and I bet many other people are in the same > >situation. > > > >If anyone can confirm this with a professional, then I think it should > >be displayed pretty clearly on a visible page, and we should find > >alternative open standards to use. > > jpackage need this kind of information to determine what could be > freely present in its rpm distribution and what should be dropped.
Yes, and it's important to find out which packages are indeed based on open standards and remove the others imediately. Not only because it's required by the licence, but because packaging them might get people to use them, and that's bad. If a package is based on an open standard and a clean room implementation exists and is comparable with the reference and has better license - I think the choice should be clear too. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
