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

Re: Heads up, slight tree path change

Andrew Haley wrote:
Douglas McClendon writes:

 > Then the final question of course would be, since derivative
 > distros of this nature are using binaries actually built by fedora,
 > will fedora be willing to go the extra mile and offer written
 > assurance to keep the source rpms available for 3 years, or
 > whatever the whole fallout from the gpl-derivative-distro thread of
 > recent history was.
> > I mean, it seems plain silly to force derivative distros, that are
 > using binaries compiled and provided by fedora, to maintain a
 > mirror of the source rpms.  Especially if as above, the yum configs
 > in the derivative distros are pointing at fedora servers anyway.

Tough.  It's what the GPL says.  If you supply someone with a binary,
you have to supply the source.  You can't point someone somewhere else
and say "the source is over there, get it yourself".

You can in some circumstances do exactly that. A derivative distribution can very well point to the upstream distribution as the canonical source if the upstream distribution agrees to it explicitly.


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