Re: New version of the Debian-java FAQ

2000-02-23 Thread Matthias Klose
FAQ 5.1.2 potato The kit is named ibm-jdk1.1-installer. The paragraph should be rewritten. It's not alpha anymore, it's not at this location anymore. It's part of potato for now. I would be interested how the license prohibits the installation by an installer The other comments regarding

Re: New version of the Debian-java FAQ

2000-02-23 Thread Peter Cordes
On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 01:19:29PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 08:52:02AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > In practice, look for "open source" in Altavista and you'll see what I mean. > > I find more confusion when searching for "free software" than when > s

Re: New version of the Debian-java FAQ

2000-02-23 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 08:52:02AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > In practice, look for "open source" in Altavista and you'll see what I mean. I find more confusion when searching for "free software" than when searching for "open source". Your point? -- %%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL

Re: New version of the Debian-java FAQ

2000-02-23 Thread tschmid
> In theory, yes. It is a trade mark, Raymond registered it, Perens wrote a > precise definition , etc. > > In practice, look for "open source" in Altavista and you'll see what I mean. I doubt that Altavista/YaHoo/... produces anything better when you look for "

Re: New version of the Debian-java FAQ

2000-02-23 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Tuesday 22 February 2000, at 22 h 1, the keyboard of Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree that "free software" is to be preferred, but your argument > is strange. "Open source" is a precisely defined concept (and thus > "means nothing" is untrue), In theory, yes. It is