Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 22:02:23 -0500 From: Drew Baxter <netmonger@genesis.ispace.com> To: Licia <licia@o-o.org>, Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD certified software (was: WordPerfect 8 for Linux) Message-ID: <4.1.19981027220052.00a7ae10@genesis.ispace.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.981027205847.9097A-100000@o-o> References: <4.1.19981027213218.00a704a0@genesis.ispace.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:01 PM 10/27/98 -0600, you wrote: >On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, Drew Baxter wrote: > >> [Clipped the crap out of this.. >> At 08:32 PM 10/27/98 -0600, you wrote: >> > >> >I think the initial idea itself is a good one. It seems like an important >> >first step towards encouraging and even validating applications developers >> >who support or specialize in FreeBSD. >> > >> >> It would also plug support in a lot of ways. Especially people saying "oh >> it works on FreeBSD, what's that?" and people would go look. All in all, I >> think it's a very sound idea and should be implemented. >> > >I think both are useful and important goals. > >> >An interesting thought, how will verification of such things be >accomplished? >> >For example, I'm developing a spam filter called Bouncer. It's a TCP daemon >> >that stands on port 25, handling all connections, passing acceptable data >> >through to any existing MTA (like sendmail) that supports a stdio smtp/esmtp >> >mode. It offers several policy mechanisms for dealing with possible spam >> >as well as ip/hostname banning for several places in the email header. I'm >> >writing it specifically for use under FreeBSD. Right now the only available >> >version is an early alpha binary.(fully functional, about 90% >> feature-complete) >> >If I were to apply for this certification for Bouncer, what criteria would I >> >need to meet? Would I need to provide source? Would I need to provide a >> >fully configured system? Would I simply need to give you my word that it's >> >there and that it works? What sort of procedure do you envision for >> >certification of this type of situation? (if source is required, I could >> >not submit it until Beta, as that is when I will release the source) >> >> That's a good question.. I'd imagine certification would be if the program >> runs on a variety of differing machines. If it's 'made in/on/for' FreeBSD, >> I'd imagine it'd be 'Designed For FreeBSD'.. >> >> Does anyone know how Microsoft does their certification? Maybe R&D goes "It >> works under Windows 95" and just puts the sticker on it. >> > >Additionally, would there be a set level of difficulty for "works with" >material? Will there be a point where the effort required to make it >work is deemed unacceptable for certification? > Well, I'd think "works with" could be emulation. Like DOS apps work with Win95, but they aren't 'Designed for' directly. So lets say, Corel 8 for Linux. If it works under Linux emulation, we put a blurb saying it needs the emulation package to run, but it "Works With FreeBSD". Alternatively, if they port it directly to FreeBSD (no emulation), it'd be "Designed For FreeBSD'. I think that's what I gathered from the previous posts.. --- Drew "Droobie" Baxter Network Admin/Professional Computer Nerd(TM) OneEX: The OneNetwork Exchange 207-942-0275 http://www.droo.orland.me.us My Latest Kernel: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT (ONEEX) #14: Mon Oct 19 22:36:58 EDT 1998 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?4.1.19981027220052.00a7ae10>