Re: mono? true?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



n0dalus wrote:

On 1/10/06, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'd be most interested to know what changed from yesterday to today. Why
is it that for FC3 and FC4 mono was a no-go and now it is allowed in.
What was the magic solution?


I'd like to know too. I noticed wine is now in FC4 extras as well. Has
Fedora changed its project goals?

n0dalus.

I think you're overlooking this section in the mono "announcement" (with my emphasis):

"This was for a variety of reasons; Some were *business-related* and others were *strategic* in nature but those don’t really matter right now."

That line doesn't say to me 'we got over the fear of patents, copyrights, and lawsuits.' That says to me, 'mono is related to Novell and/or Microsoft, and Red Hat didn't like that.' I'm in no way the type of person worries that Red Hat is out to screw over the community, and I realize that this 0xdeadbeef site isn't an official spokesperson for Red Hat, but in this particular case it sure looks like an admission that people weren't being entirely up-front about the motivations behind their actions. I'm not saying this to stir up trouble, but rather to point out how it appears so that those involved can clarify, if appropriate.

DC

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Photo Sharing]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]