4 Jul 2002 11:32
packaging `open-source'
S11001001 <rushing <at> sigecom.net>
2002-07-04 09:32:21 GMT
2002-07-04 09:32:21 GMT
I quote from a Mandrake spec for DotGNU Portable .NET: Name: pnet Version: 0.3.8 Release: 1mdk Summary: A portable interpreter for .NET plateform binaries Group: Development/Other License: GPL Source: http://www.southern-storm.com.au/download/%name-%version.tar.bz2URL: http://www.southern-storm.com.au Buildrequires: treecc >= 0.1.0 Buildroot: %_tmppath/%name-%version-buildroot %description The primary goal of this project is to build a stable and portable interpreter for .NET platform binaries, together with a suite of open source tools to build .NET applications. The initial target platform is Linux, with other platforms to follow in the future. Now, since pnet is a GNU project, *and* Southern Storm says `free software' not `open source', would it be appropriate to tell the spec writers to change that annoying `bug'? -- -- Stephen Compall DotGNU `Contributor' -- http://www.dotgnu.org It read like a socialist polemic, but I saw something different. I saw a business plan in disguise.(Continue reading)
RSS Feed