On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:17:16AM -0400, Eric H. Christensen wrote:
> That's great that these companies contribute to FOSS projects. I'm less
> likely to complain about services that are developed as FOSS that they are
> commericalizing. Making it easier for our users to start using their
> closed projects, however, is not okay. It does not forward our cause for
> FOSS. Otherwise we could lump Microsoft into that group since they have
> made contributions to FOSS projects (including the kernel) in the past.
So, from the three issues that I identified in the board ticket
(presentation of proprietary web services as applications, curation of the
list of services, applications interacting with proprietary services in
general), it seems like you are really more interested in the _second_ part:
the selection and curation of the list. Not _necessarily_ whether the
website code (either frontend or backend) is free / open source, although
you consider that an important factor.
Is that a fair characterization?
--
Matthew Miller -- Fedora Project -- <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"Tepid change for the somewhat better!"
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
