[FreeNX-kNX] freenx is dead !

[Johnny Hughes]

Durk Strooisma wrote:
>> I've been made aware of some even more important (and good) reasons for
>> not following the FHS when installing NX. More important reasons than
>> the ones I gave above. Read about them here:
>>
>>   http://www.nomachine.com/ar/view.php?ar_id=AR01C00130
>>
>> I can understand these. They are even "heavy" enough to keep violating
>> the FHS even *after* the GPL source base of NX have moved to a newer
>> Xorg's FHS template layout (contrary to what I stated as "very likely
>> will be too much work").
> 
> Honestly I'm not really impressed. Seems more like a configuration
> management issue and more important to developers than end users.
> Distributions like Debian need to change the structure anyway, as violating
> the FHS is not allowed. It's more work for them.
> 
> The reasons NoMachine is giving could be true for almost every piece of
> software. Nothing special in there. Still a lot of software projects obey
> the FHS. It's just a matter of preference. Apparently, NoMachine finds
> keeping everything in one place more important than being
> standards-complaint.
> Durk

Not sure what the question or problem is ... it is their code to manage
however they like.  It might be harder for debian (or CentOS in my case)
to make it FHS compliant, however there are plenty of projects where the
code isn't where we want it.  We just move it ... not sure why it is a
problem.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/freenx-knx/attachments/20071102/7ebb9e65/attachment.sig>