On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 04:33:22PM -0400, James A. Treacy wrote: > Here are some suggested changes to the file. I only corrected for > spelling and grammar. I do have two questions though. Should we keep the
Thanks, it was written hastily (sp?)
> historical (not produced anymore) distros? Second, the section on Corel
IMHO yes. It's important to know both what happens and what
happened. We could probably, though, make a new list with "Historical
distributions" and add them in.
A good example of why we should keep this information is Corel: it
seems they have created a new company to market Corel Linux with a new
name.
My reasons for including it is the same that drives us to keep
updated the project_history document: don't forget what happened before
(so we can learn for the future)
> talks about KDE licensing issues. That doesn't seem relevant to
> this page. Shouldn't it be removed?
No, it's part of Corel's history. I say we keep it there. We could also
talk about the "Open Source" issues (Corel did not contribute that much to
Debian AFAIK, whileas Progeny still does). IMHO.
Regards
Javi
pgpJsCRgzzmsT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
