Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:15:10 -0800 (PST) From: "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Let's nail some things down. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9810281108590.782-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <36375E2B.7FB07828@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
We will have two logos. "Works with" and "Designed for". Do we agree? The test for "Works with" should be a simple "can it run under some sort of emulation?" (E.G acroread) The test for "Designed for" should be "can we build it from source?" or "did the developer build FreeBSD native binaries?". (E.G. netscape and all source available ports) Do the above statements seem reasonable? If so, let's set them in stone so we can reduce the number of degrees of freedom in this problem and work toward a solution. I think Wes' concerns about "giant infrastructure" are valid. I think the KISS principle should apply. Do we agree? Catchya Later, | UW Mechanical Engineering Jason Wells | http://weber.u.washington.edu/~jcwells/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9810281108590.782-100000>