codec buddy pain
Vladimir Kosovac
vnk at mkc.co.nz
Mon Nov 5 03:51:48 UTC 2007
seth vidal wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 20:14 -0500, Christopher Blizzard wrote:
>> seth vidal wrote:
>>> http://lwn.net/Articles/256974/
>>>
>>> Btw - in the interview they mention further integration of the webstore
>>> into codeina/codecbuddy. If it starts looking like we're pushing closed
>>> source software then that, imo, is when codeina gets dumped out of the
>>> distribution.
>>>
>>> I don't care about needles and I don't want to ween the addicts off.
>> Pushing or making available? Or making it easy?
>>
>
> The precedent is what I'm most worried about:
>
> we're okay having sales items for closed-source codecs in our distro
> what about drivers?
> what about closed-source application software? opera? matlab?
>
> Seriously, at what point do we draw the line and what criteria do we use
> to distinguish one item from the other?
>
If I may - wasn't that line drawn quite a while ago, by stating Fedora
goals?
Codec buddy inclusion does not leave a bad taste (although this is very
arguable) in the commercial context - the fact that it directly links to
and encourages the use of non-Free stuff does.
Vladimir
> -sv
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fedora-advisory-board mailing list
> fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 251 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20071105/ecaaced9/attachment.sig>
More information about the fedora-advisory-board
mailing list