Good point. At least I included a license (albeit incorrectly), Haiku-Files (run by Haiku) doesn't on their website. As well for the packages... i.e:# Subversion <http://www.haiku-files.org/files/Subversion-1.1.3.pkg># SSH <http://www.haiku-files.org/files/ssh-3.9-r5.pkg> [for BONE <http://www.haiku-files.org/files/ssh-3.9-bone.pkg>] # Dev Tools for BeOS R5 <http://www.bebits.com/app/2680> (replace GCC with newer version below)# GCC compiler 2.95.3 <http://www.bebits.com/app/4011> # Jam Haiku build system tool <http://www.haiku-files.org/files/jam.zip>
But these packages are for the system that's building Haiku. They don't end up on the Haiku image unless specifically requested when building. And even in that case, they are downloaded separately. So it's not quite the same thing.
In any case, I think Karl's doing a good thing here, and I think he's shown good faith by responding to concerns addressed on this list. So let's not beat him up too much.
On the other hand, I understand Haiku, Inc's zeal in protecting the image of Haiku. I think in the end we're not going to be able to prevent a proliferation of distros a la Linux, but at least the requirement that it say "based on Haiku" and be called by some other name will help clear things up somewhat.
Perhaps Karl needs to rename his version "KarlOS - based on Haiku" or something like that. Of course, if he's trying to keep up with progress as it occurs, that might be a little difficult.
