[WBEL-devel] An "Issue" with WBEL (pun intended)

[John Morris]

On 13 Dec 2003, Simon J Mudd wrote:

> It would be better IMO that the redhat-release package mimicked the RH
> version, and perhaps whatever other tests are generally will work
> equally well on WBL.  That way applications designed for RHEL should
> recognise WBL as RHEL and should generally work without
> problems... AND vice versa. This provides a larger audience to the
> software for both OSes.

This isn't the first time it has been suggested that redhat-release should
remain present.  Personally, can't see why it would be a bad thing to drop
in a hardlink between whitebox-release and redhat-release for final.  
Didn't do it during the RC phase to catch as many internal references as
possible because internal references was likely something that would need
de-trademarking.  So unless anyone can come up with a good reason NOT to,
a link will go in the final release.

-- 
John M.      http://www.beau.org/~jmorris        This post is 100% M$ Free!
Geekcode 3.1:GCS C+++ UL++++$ P++ L+++ W++ w--- Y++ b++ 5+++ R tv- e* r