IMO, providing CVS is enough. For open source principles, fine, but I don't see why one would want to use the finkcommander source tgz to install it. Anyway, I didn't realize people cared so much, since you do, we can post em.
Would you like to be the FC releasemeister? I like coding and updating it and such but making releases is just a big hassle. FC in general needs more help, since you know its just me now.
I'm not sure what you mean by the Fink community not spending the resources to help FinkCommander, or what resources it might be lacking. :) (I do think more people should be using FC though, at least as a nice convenient package list GUI... no need to use it for installing or building)
You don't need to quote licenses at me. The GPL is satisfied if i am willing to MAIL you a CD of the sources, UPON YOUR REQUEST, including my costs. That also fully satisfies the 'principles' of open source. I don't even have to post the source for download at all. But anyway, all i did was ask why. I didn't think anyone actually cared.
-Ben
On Apr 19, 2004, at 11:48 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
In this case, even the cvs repository doesn't seem to be up to date. The cvs sources build version 0.5.2. And If you want to check out the sources for 0.5.2, you are lost, too: There is no 0.5.2 tag. So I honestly don't know from what sources this version of FinkCommander was built. I am pretty sure there used to be a 0.5.2 tarball on sourceforge for a while, but this seems to have disappeared, too.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
