[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Re: Definition of Open Source [was Re: pine: UW permission to distribute]

Hello Michael,

On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 15:35, Michael Tiemann wrote:
> Moreover, it was my opinion that there were many important contributors
> who would be uninterested in making Fedora their preferred platform for
> development if we incorporated proprietary software into the core.  I
> argued that it was better to give people the option to package and
> maintain proprietary software on top of a free core than to exclude
> people who reject non-free software.

I assume you will also address the issue whether non free or "semi free"
software can be distributed from Fedora Extras and if so how. And how to
integrate other solutions. I think Jeff summed it up nicely in his last

> I am trying to finish a draft statement for discussion on Fedora
> policies and processes.  This draft is /not/ an official Red Hat
> position (at least not yet).

Any chance that with the help of a few other Red Hat developers (and of
course agreement from management) such a draft can be turned into an
official proposal for discussion? Do you have concrete plans in this

> I also second the notion of creating fedora-legal as a place to have
> licensing, trademark, and other legal-related discussions.

For strictly legal issues this is probably a good idea. But the
discussion about which licenses to accept has practical implications so
we shouldn't segregate the issues too strictly.


mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]