[ydl-gen] Re: pine: was: Re: JOB POSTING: Application Evangelist

[Mark Guertin]

I would suggest you direct your complaints to the creators of pine in  
this case.  Most distros are released under the GNU license, and  
their proprietary licensing makes this not possible.

Also it is a big liability to the distribution to release  
applications that they have no control over, picture this scenerio  
for a moment if you will;  a buffer overflow exploit is found in pine  
that gives root privileges.  How does the distro respond to this?   
Does it email it's entire userbase and advise them that a program  
that was supplied to them through their distribution is now unsafe  
and they are unable to do anything about it, and that until the  
vendor manages to put out a patch for it they should uninstall it?

I suspect these are the exact reason that it is not included as it is  
a large liability.  You are venting your frustrations on the wrong  
parties here.  Talk to the creators of pine to release in an approved  
license and you will probably see it get picked back up by the distros.

Until that point if you want that sort of software you'll have to get  
used to downloading it from other sources and/or possible compiling  
it yourself.

All of your arguments are for naught, this thread is  a waste of  
bandwidth.

Mark

On 28-Aug-05, at 9:48 AM, Eric Dunbar wrote:

> To fail to explicitly include pine and support it is a distro doing a
> *disservice* to the distro's users. I have yet to see a distro include
> an acceptable alternative and it's not exactly the easiest piece of
> software to install for people who aren't familiar with the inner
> workings of yum or apt-get or...