100% redistributable software repositories ("official" Fedora Third Party?) -- WAS: OpenGL

[Bryan J. Smith]

"Lamont R. Peterson" <lamont at gurulabs.com> wrote:
> Actually, Adobe Reader (they've dropped the work "Acrobat" from it)
> is freely redistributable.

It is freely redistributable, not merely just freely downloadable?
If this is the case, then why isn't it at least in Livna.ORG?
[ Thanx for the heads-up and correcting my ignorance ]

> When you install SUSE LINUX 10.0 (or 9.3 or 9.2 or any older
> versions that include Adobe Reader) you have to agree to the Adobe
> EULA either before the installation begins and when each user runs
> Adobe Reader for the first time, or just when each user launches
> it.

Yes, I've run into that myself.  That's actually an _ideal_ model to
use for "click-through" when it comes to end-user software.

> This is perfectly legal and Red Hat could *legally* include Adobe
> Reader in a similar fashion.  However, I don't think they should.
> Despite the fact that it would be "legal" to redistribute the
> binary, it's still not open source.  *Everything* in Fedora and
> RHEL is open source.

I agree with you when it comes to Fedora Core, Extras and the CDs.

*HOWEVER*, I think it's time that Red Hat and the Fedora Foundation
look at fostering a repository _separate_ from Livna.ORG where 100%
freely redistributable software can be tapped.

> Yes, I know; Red Hat's RHN Proxy Server and RHN Satellite Server
> products are not open source.  They are the only two exceptions
> and I have no problem with them being that way.

I'm not considering at Red Hat's RHEL/subscription developments.
That's an argumentative viewpoint some people have and like to make.
I can appreciate what Red Hat does, for the good of the community.

I'm just concerned with Fedora.  I 100% understand and appreciate why
Fedora Core/Extras have their guidelines -- but I think it's time
that Red Hat takes a more active role in "Fedora Third Party" where
vendors can drop off 100% redsitritand _not_ just leave it to
Livna.ORG.

Livna.ORG is a legal nightmare.  It's fine and I personally use it at
home.  But I _never_ use it in a corporate environment, as it would
be a major indemification issue -- much like 99% of Knoppix variants.
 It would be nice to have a "Fedora Third Party" repository full of
100% redistributable software.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith   Professional, Technical Annoyance
b.j.smith at ieee.org    http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------
I'm a Democrat.  No wait, I'm a Republican.  Hmm,
it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with.