On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 18:29, William M. Quarles wrote: > Who made the not-very-bright decision of choosing X.org over XFree86 for > Fedora Core 2, and WHY? > > I also LOVE (sorry, I was sarcastic, DESPISE) this item in the Release > Notes for FC 2: > "This release is a merger of the previous official X11R6 release, > XFree86 4.4.0rc2, and additionally includes a number of updates" > 1. XFree86 4.4.0rc2 was not a release (hence the rc, "release candidate") even Betas are releases because the authors release them. > 2. It's not like XFree86 4.4 didn't come out. Did you read the license? I thought not > 3. What is that made XFree86 no longer official? Because some corporate > bubbleheads decided to get together, swipe another organizations code > and pose it as their own? Please. > Corporate? no way! Bubbleheads? not for me to say. In any event you'll find that none of the majors are releasing new distros with xfree86 due to the change in their license. You are free to download and install any software you choose though, it's your dime. > I thought Fedora Core was going to be less corporate and more open now > that Red Hat is no longer making Red Hat Linux. Apparently that isn't > the case. If things keep going this way, I'm going to find another > distribution. I certainly am not going to "upgrade to Fedora Core 2." > Good luck to all of you braving the frontiers of the 2.6 kernel, too. > > Peace, > William Red Hat never said that they intended to change anything and didn't stop making Red Hat (though they call it Enterprise)They are also legally responsible for Fedora, so expect them to be more circumspect than some other distros.
