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

Re: to autodownload or not to autodownload

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 13:03:21 -0900
"Jeff Spaleta" <jspaleta gmail com> wrote:

> On Feb 10, 2008 12:28 PM, Jaroslaw Gorny <jaroslav aster pl> wrote:
> > On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:32:51 -0900
> > "Jeff Spaleta" <jspaleta gmail com> wrote:
> >
> > > It's absolutely possible for someone to build the
> > > bits so that livna rpm packages are part of the choices once
> > > livna-release package is installed.
> >
> > How could that be? Now it is not legal even to display a message
> > like:
> > "If you are outside US, you can use packages from livna.org"
> > So, would it be legal to point users to livna RPMS with an offer to
> > install?
> You quoted the statement that answers this, maybe I didn't say it loud
> enough....
> I did not say... by default.

Ah, OK, you're right, sorry, I've misunderstood that.
> Look here's the deal.  We can't tell people go to livna for this or
> that package. But it seems like we do have the ability to tell people
> that livna exists.. if we do not abuse that ability by pointing to
> livna for specific things.
> (...)

Wouldn't it be a potential problem? It's nothing else than 'indirect'
advisory. Like "Look, I won't tell you where you can buy a gun, but
please visit the guy at the corner of X and Y, he's got a lot of
interesting stuff".
I'm perfectly OK with that, but would US-law be as well?

> What I need...what the board needs...what the Fedora community
> needs... are people who are willing to do the technical work make
> steps 3 and 4 and work on the integration issues.

This would require changes in codeina as well I suppose. Codeina (src)
is hosted @ fluendo.com - will they accept that?



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