| 1 |
On Thursday 14 Jun 2007 1:54:51 am Vlastimil Babka wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> But maybe Skype is not so pressing to upgrade, just doesn't provide |
| 4 |
> distfiles anymore. Then maybe we don't have to obey, but still it's |
| 5 |
> really questionable if it should be marked stable at all. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
Then don't mark it stable but dropping it from the tree altogether? That is |
| 8 |
taking it a bit too far imho. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> And yeah I'm a Java dev but at least Java is now open (I admit that the |
| 12 |
> stable VM's in tree are not, yet) and I don't see that coming for Skype. |
| 13 |
> Also Java (and your examples of closed source stuff) are not infamous |
| 14 |
> for the bad stuff mentioned above. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
Has any one done the same kind of analysis on all the closed source |
| 17 |
applications we have in tree? If we take an alternate view on the wikipedia |
| 18 |
link then it can be said that it is just an attempt for spreading FUD while |
| 19 |
trying to pimp Open Source alternatives? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Don't get me wrong...I love open source and that is one of the reasons why I |
| 22 |
have been using GNU/Linux for many years but acting paranoid and dropping |
| 23 |
popular packages from tree is not something, I as a common user, would like |
| 24 |
to see. This is the only reason I am poking my nose in the workings of devs. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
Abhay |
Archives