[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [seul-edu] ISO evals
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: [seul-edu] ISO evals
- From: Doug Loss <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 08:16:24 -0500
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivery-date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 08:16:27 -0500
- In-reply-to: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAnmoDUTaWM0CEbnmmTn/Fy8KAAAAQAAAAMp/85mb5xk+iGB8NKYwjGQEAAAAA@acm.org>
- Organization: Bloomsburg University
- References: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAnmoDUTaWM0CEbnmmTn/Fy8KAAAAQAAAAMp/85mb5xk+iGB8NKYwjGQEAAAAA@acm.org>
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: email@example.com
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
Darryl Palmer wrote:
I've been following this discussion and I think I may see a way to "have
our cake and eat it too." Doesn't Debian maintain a section for
non-free software that doesn't meet their guidelines but that they
acknowledge may be of interest to some people? Perhaps we should keep
the basic ISO to just the apps that are Free/Open Source, but maintain a
separate section (as a separate ISO) for things like XEphem, xplns, etc.
I am not talking about us never having software that is non-free on the
ISO CD, I am saying that we should not have non-free software on THIS
ISO CD. Any software that is non-free or has a strange license
agreement that doesn't allow unlimited distribution and modification is
a problem. It is easier for all software that falls in this category to
be conditionally added to the ISO rather than all of non-free software
being on the CD and we conditionally remove the ones that cause us
problems. Any license agreement that is not-free will have to be
examined carefully to determine what its impact will be on the CD
distribution, Internet download, 3rd party distribution, and custom
modifications for Linux distribution and/or FHS compliance.
We'll have to deal with them sooner or later, though. Of course, let's
not rush into things rather than working out the best way to integrate them.
Java2 applications will make PhaseIV more challenging. By removing them
now it will be easier.
Having something to hand out at NECC was one of my (personal) goals,
although I don't think it was a major one for the project as a whole.
However, in thinking about it I realized that our ISO probably wouldn't
be the appropriate hand-out for that conference. It will presuppose an
existing Linux installation, as it won't include Linux itself. This is
probably something we can't expect in any great numbers from the
attendees at this conference. I think OSEF's and OFSET's Knoppix-based
bootable CDs with educational apps on them are much better to use as
introductions to Linux in education for the non-Linux-aware educators we
expect to see at NECC. Since Harry McGregor from OSEF will be there, I
think we'll assist him in handing out the OSEF CD, and I may see if I
can burn a useful amount of the Freeduc CD too.
I thought one of the goals was to have something for Doug and other
SEUL/edu people to hand out at the NECC conference this year. The
conference is 12 weeks from Monday and if we need a lead time of a week
or two for CD production, we have only 10 weeks to not only perform
Phase 3, but also Phase 4. If handing out CDs at NECC this year is not
necessary or not practical, then there is no problem if we extend this
ISO project for the rest of year.
So don't feel too much pressure from NECC as a deadline. Having said
that, don't of course assume that we can take all the time in the world
to work on this; we do need to keep progressing if we're ever to create
a usable product.
If this helped you please take the time to rate the value
of this post; just click on the Affero link below.
Doug Loss Courage is resistance to
Data Network Coordinator fear, mastery of fear --
Bloomsburg University not absence of fear.
firstname.lastname@example.org Mark Twain