FS/OSS license: not quite enough of a requirement

[Rahul Sundaram]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> I really don't understand the kind of opposition I'm getting in this
> issue.  I know I've brought up other controversial ones, but this is
> not it.  This is just meant to codify what I thought we had consensus
> on.

Nobody is opposing what you are saying but what you are saying is 
getting lost in all the rhetoric questions. You got to stop doing that 
if you want to get your message across since trying to read your actual 
point in between all these is getting tiresome.

Do you have access to the wiki? If not read 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WikiEditing and get wiki access. That 
would also help if you want to contribute towards setting up jidgo for 
the infrastructure team.

Then write up a draft policy following instructions at 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Committee#head-bc786fd8400956418c30ac87c30733f0c008b146

The next board meeting when folks are back from the Red Hat summit we 
will discuss things and do the changes necessary.

Good that you don't want non-free documentation because GNU FDL with 
invariant sections is IMO clearly non-free and I would like to clarify 
the guidelines to not include such documents too.

Rahul