Re: FAQ - revised ... again :)

[Kevin Forge <forge@forge.kfs>]

We have had this discussion before.  We do not need to have it 
again.  We are based on RedHat because there are books on RedHat 
in the shops where our target audience buys.  We are based on 
RedHat because Our target audience can find RedHat and RedHat
based packages in those same stores.  

We are based on RedHat because It's hard enough getting the newbi 
to install RPMs and DEBs and we want to minimize the possibility 
that he must install a tarball.  

Until something major changes we are still to be based on RedHat.
Major includes Corel Linux becoming very popular early next year 
( A possibility ).

Karlis Loen wrote:
> 
> Or why not Slackware 7?  It just came out, and it rules.  :)
> 
> 'course, i'm a Slackware fan...
> 
> -Karlis Loen
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Donovan Rebbechi <elflord@pegasus.rutgers.edu>
> To: <independence-l@independence.seul.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 30, 1999 6:00 AM
> Subject: Re: FAQ - revised ... again :)
> 
> > On Fri, 29 Oct 1999 n7su@micron.net wrote:
> >
> > > presenting a simple fact that Indy is based on RH and some reasons why
> it was
> > > done. I don't know anything about Debian, Jean must think it is
> necessary to
> > > give a reason why Indy was not based on Debian. I don't know.
> >
> > Debian are the leading free distribution. So we need to distinguish
> > ourself from them, ie what can we offer that they don't ? Why don't we
> > just merge with them, since they're the main free distribution ? These are
> > natural questions, and we need to answer them.
> >
> > --
> > Donovan
> >
> >