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

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



Hi,

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

Currently, if I import a package which is found to break some patent or
other or copyright or basically I don't have permission to include but
has managed to sneak through the review process, then it is not RedHat
who is held to account or the reviewer, but me as the person who brings
it in, so if BigCorpUSA decides to go after someone, it's me.

If I submit and maintain something for a commercial product
(irrespective of the company), I would expect some degree of protection
from that company if BigCorpUSA decided to have ago.

> 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?  

From very bitter experience, it makes no difference if it's volunteer or
optional add-on basis. If the package it is part of or carries the name
of is commercial, some crook/bottom feeder (damn, I really should not
use such terms for those of the legal profession ;-p) is bound to have a
go.

I package a heck of a lot of packages for mono within FE. If you cast
your mind back, there was a time when RH would rather have given Darl a
warm handshake and a slap up burger than have mono as part of FC. That
changed and we now have mono and mono packages in Core and Extras.

Suppose the Borg decides to exercise a pile of patents, under the
current rules RH cops a packet and so do I. RH has a lot behind them, I
don't. Mono gets drummed out of existence and so do I. Now, if the mono
packages are in RHELE, RH will have earned money from the core package
and probably on the value added of the massive number of packages
available ready to install. I would expect some form of protection from
RH.

> 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].

As has been said though, those purchasing RHEL will expect a much higher
level of support and quality than in FE. It has the RH name on it, it's
paid for, folks expect something more - I would imagine that the review
process would be by RH engineers (goodness help us - some of the spec
files I've seen make me cringe!)

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

Dunno.

TTFN

Paul
-- 
"Bist Du meine Mutter?" - das leere kind

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


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