http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono

[Adam Jackson]

On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 09:56 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 10:24:24AM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> > http://port25.technet.com/archive/2009/07/06/the-ecma-c-and-cli-standards.aspx
> 
> Oh poo, and what's the difference? None. None whatsoever but more marketing.
> 
> You can't distribute GPL'ed software unless you have the right to do it.
> 
> The promise makes quite sure to tell you you have no right[1], but you can
> infringe that they won't sue *you*[2].

I am unable to read the Community Promise in any way that implies either
of the above.  Please cite exactly which statement in the Community
Promise you take issue with.

http://www.microsoft.com/interop/cp/default.mspx

- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090707/8392964a/attachment.sig>