As of now Speakup is supported by both RH and Slack. And as for the most GPL heavygroup Debian, Speakup won't be in that distro for quite some time to come I suspect aside from the modified installers we make. I've actually tried several times to see about getting speakup included in to the distro and the idea I got back from them was basically, its a nice product but doesn't benefit the majority of us so we won't include it in to the install process. In a way I do see their point because there's not only that issue to deal with we'd also have to make it work on all the different machine types debian runs on and we don't have any way of testing this. So to those who think RH is the bad guy in this market their not in my opinion. Hate to say it this way but when people think of linux they think of Red Hat so having Speakup out there for the general public to get their hands on is a good thing. Tommy On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 01:27:13PM -0700, Darrell Shandrow wrote: > Hi Adam, > > Oh, well, RedHat has clearly shown its distain for open standards and the > entire open-source GPL principle through its poor handling of accessibility > issues surrounding its certification exams and its course materials. > Further, RedHat may have even shown malice toward at least one blind person, > by doing almost everything possible to try and stand in his way of earning > his RHCE certification. Jason's testimonial of how RedHat attempted to > deliberately stand in his way of earning his RHCE is still resonating within > me, and I'm still trying to figure out how to channel this new anger toward > RH in order to get them to make appropriate changes!!! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Adam Myrow" <amyrow at midsouth.rr.com> > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 10:47 AM > Subject: Re: 8.0 problems. > > > > On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Janina Sajka wrote: > > > Seems to me you can't have it both ways, logically speaking. Not that > > > anyone needs to be logical, I guess. But, I don't understand the > > > principles you seem to be trying to espouse here. What are they, > > > exactly? > > > > > > > I guess what I am trying to say is that Redhat is breaking compatibility > > for no logical reason other than to promote themselves as being ahead of > > the pack. Dropping MP3 support in this release, stating that they are > > dropping Lilo in the next release, and this clock thing. It has nothing > > to do with the GPL here. The GPL lets them do all this, but I just don't > > agree with the whole idea. Let me ask you something. Suppose the next > > release of Redhat decides to drop DOS and VFAT filesystem support. Would > > that not upset a lot of people who still expect to be able to read their > > Windows partitions in Linux? They could argue that they are dropping > > support for FAT and VfFAT because by supporting these filesystem formats, > > they are supporting a closed OS. You have to draw the line somewhere in > > how rigidly you will follow the teachings of Richard Stalman and how much > > you will support those who are trying to migrate from the closed world of > > Windows to the open world of Linux. Consumers are hard to change, so we > > need to slowly pull them to Linux. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
