On 06/10/2016 03:21 PM, Julie Marchant wrote: >> We are trying to have PureOS, our distribution reviewed, nothing more. >> So let's discuss those points. > > It is a relevant point to consider because you are behind PureOS. Not > because you being a malicious actor makes your distro proprietary per > se, but because we should be much more weary of your word than most > people's.
You are accusing us of being a malicious actor? And you are supposed to be an impartial judge of the endorsement criteria? I will not respond to the rest of the off-topic agenda being pursued. Please respond to what was asked originally. What area of PureOS do we need to address, if any, to become an endorsed distribution? Thanks. Todd.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
