yOn Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Dain Sundstrom wrote: > I don't think my statement was harsh. I run Debian on some of my servers, > and always wondered why people bitched about Debian. Now I know.
People run redhat. People bitch. People switch to Debian. People bitch. People join Debian. Debian maintainers bitch. > I was voting to not build a DEB, because it appears to take a lot of work to > remove all the dependencies. Instead we build an RPM (not RMP) and include > everything as it is. The point is an easy install for Unix right? Or are we > trying to please the Debian folks? You are confusing .deb with Debian. You can put whatever you want into a .deb. The same with an .rpm. However, to go into Debian, there is some policy that has to be followed. JBoss could be installed into /usr/local(or /opt), be in .deb and .rpm form, and everyone would be happy. It's only when being uploaded to Debian that there are rules that must be followed. > As a final not, just because our code is LPGL, has no bearing on the binary > distribution. You can take the code and do what ever you want. But you distribute non-lgpl code(in binary form) alongside your lgpl code. Has someone gone thru every single piece of external software, reading the license, to see if this is allowed? (my mail showed it was allowed for jaxp, but only for the initial downloader. If someone else were to redistribute what jboss makes available for download, then it is not allowed). _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
