Re: [ros-dev] Vote: Allow 3rd-party distribution of ROS through XDCC Bot.

[Steven Edwards]

--- Alex Ionescu <ionucu(a)videotron.ca> wrote:
>   [ ] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS
> through the #ros-xdcc 
>  channel and ROS-XDCC-001 bot. (support and encourage this distribution)
>  
>  [X] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS, but it must clearly 
>  distance itself from officially supported releases (tolerate but do not 
>  support this distribution) 
Yes but only if they are using a binary published by reactos.org or a core ReactOS
developer such
as Thomas's nightly builds. If they are not doing so then my vote is no. At the first
offence we
should warn them and then at the 2nd offence we should deny the use of the ReactOS name
 
>   [ ] No, only sourceforge and other official ReactOS
> distribution points 
>  should be used. 
We cannot stop distrabution of the OS. Only the use of the name.

Thanks
Steven



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

[Michael Trausch]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Steven Edwards wrote:
>   
>  We cannot stop distrabution of the OS. Only the use of the name.
>   
It would seem to make sense to make it a requirement to change the
version number to reflect that a change has been made and that the
release is not an "official" ReactOS release.  As a hypothetical
example, if I were to fork ReactOS and create releases of it, it
would make sense for me to append -custom or -mt or something to the
version number, to signify that it's a custom/altered release.

Also, for definitive releases and such, it would make sense to sign
the binaries with something like GPG, so that they can be verified
against a ReactOS key for the purpose of signing binary releases.

I think people should be able to state that their release is based
on the ReactOS kernel and applications, but is not official.

This would be similar to the many various Linux distributions, and
what they do with various things, in a way.  Most people tend to
differentiate using obvious language, for example, Dropline GNOME
isn't just GNOME, it's Dropline GNOME, so it's obvious that it's
based on GNOME with enhancements/changes in the source code.

	Later,
	Mike

- --
Michael B. Trausch                               <fd0man(a)gmail.com>
Blog/Website: http://fd0man.chadeux.net/            AIM: MB Trausch
Phone: [phone]              FAX (US Only): 1-866-806-4647
===================================================================
Need computer or Linux work in Atlanta?      http://www.mbtcis.com/
Do you have PGP or GPG?  Key at pgp.mit.edu, Please Encrypt E-Mail!

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1-nr1 (Windows 2000)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFCNIqIPXInbkqM7nwRAxDDAJ9sguNlV94GvEc6mq64C9TVB3Q4ZgCfb78r
> p9yr4P9vt081wyseyohy4Gk=
> =FYcq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----