será que a FSF não deveria reavaliar sua postura contra implementação de suporte livre ao formato proprietário DWG ? Ou o relato do meu colega é equivocado?<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rodrigopitanga@gmail.com">rodrigopitanga@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Wed, May 13, 2009 at 3:22 PM<br>Subject: High Priority Free Software Projects<br>
To: Felipe Sanches <<a href="mailto:felipe.sanches@gmail.com">felipe.sanches@gmail.com</a>><br><br><br>No OpenDWG a FSF aparentemente é contra implementar uma lib livre para<br>
um formato proprietário. Mas veja a prioridade posterior:<br>
<br>
Free software to support RARv3<br>
<br>
While not recommended for typical usage, especially when formats like<br>
bzip2 and xz can provide high-levels of compression whilst supporting<br>
free software, the RARv3 archive format supports split volumes, and<br>
other features. The only free software presently available for it is<br>
unrarlib, which can only read rar archives, not write them, and only<br>
up to rar v2.9, not the now-prevalent rar v3. Supporting it will take<br>
some effort, since the file format is not publicly documented, it will<br>
have to be reverse-engineered from rar files.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva<br>
Engenharia de Computação - Coop8<br>
<br>
"Free software is defined as software that respects four fundamental<br>
freedoms: (0) freedom to run the software as you wish, (1) freedom to<br>
study the source code and modify it to do what you wish, (2) freedom<br>
to make and redistribute copies, and (3) freedom to publish modified<br>
versions." Richard Stallman<br>
<br>
"Não importa como morre o home, importa como vive." Carijó, velho do rio.<br>
</div><br>