New covenant published

[Alex Hudson]

On 23/12/09 18:58, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 12/23/2009 01:56 PM, Alex Hudson wrote:
>    
>> Can I ask on what grounds? Is the patent license insufficient, or is
>> there some other problem?
>>
>> It's difficult to fix things if we don't know what's broken.
>>      
> The most obvious issue is that it does not cover Distributors besides
> Novell.
>    

I thought that was the whole reason a new covenant has been issued, so 
that people other than Novell could distribute it. Looking over it, I 
don't really see where any distinction between Novell and anyone else is 
made.

It would be useful to have some response from legal people about the 
exact issues which remain. It seems to me highly unlikely that problems 
are going to be resolved unless the problems are made clear; and the 
movement on this issue appears to be in the right direction.

I realise a number of people don't care for Mono-related technologies, 
but it would be sad to see Fedora left out in the cold for this stuff.

Cheers

Alex.