[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] review PureOS ISO

From: Todd Weaver
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] review PureOS ISO
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 16:03:48 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.1.0

On 06/10/2016 03:21 PM, Julie Marchant wrote:
>> We are trying to have PureOS, our distribution reviewed, nothing more.
>> So let's discuss those points.
> It is a relevant point to consider because you are behind PureOS. Not
> because you being a malicious actor makes your distro proprietary per
> se, but because we should be much more weary of your word than most
> people's.

You are accusing us of being a malicious actor?
And you are supposed to be an impartial judge of the endorsement criteria?

I will not respond to the rest of the off-topic agenda being pursued.

Please respond to what was asked originally. What area of PureOS do we
need to address, if any, to become an endorsed distribution?



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]