Re: We are evaluating building packages from Fedora Extras for RHEL

[Ed Hill <ed eh3 com>]

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:25:57 +0100
Paul <paul all-the-johnsons co uk> wrote:
> 
> Again, the problem is not so much if it works and works happily
> under RHEL/CentOS, but the QA/QC expected of a commercial product.
> Me, I am happy to have the no-cost RHEL licence, a copy of the
> distro and some RedHat freebies (come on, there has to be
> something!), but would be looking at some form of indemnification
> from RH should something get through which causes problems for the
> commercial client. I don't mind carrying the can for stuff I do in
> FE, but would have qualms for the RHEL.


Hi Paul,

I don't understand the "indemnification" bit.  But, IANAL.  :-)

If "EE" becomes a collection of stuff supplied on a "volunteer" and
"optional add-on basis" (much the same as FE is currently provided)
then why would I or any other volunteer need indemnification?  I
mean, folks purchase RHEL (and all the related support services,
etc.)  and "EE" is (or perhaps could be) just a collection of
separate volunteer-provided add-ons [that just happen to have been
through a community review process and are, as a result, likley to
be of good qulaity].

Or am I mis-understanding what "EE" is liklely to become?

Ed

-- 
Edward H. Hill III, PhD  |  ed eh3 com  |  http://eh3.com/