[fab] [Fwd: Free software and Fedora: Dissected]
Rahul
sundaram at fedoraproject.org
Mon Jul 31 09:13:18 UTC 2006
Hi,
I asked spot to help me with the license analysis to look at any
potential non-free packages that we would have to lose by endorsing only
Free software in our guidelines (as defined by FSF). Spot pointed out
that FSF has described the original artistic license
(http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#NonFreeSoftwareLicense
) as ambiguous but David Turner from FSF didnt list any of the Perl
packages as non-free. We require more clarification on this.
On a earlier discussion, it was pointed out that by Jeremy Katz that our
guidelines
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-adf31c383612aac313719f7b4f8167b7dcf245d2)
allow inclusion on binary firmware when licensed in a appropriate
manner. The advantage in including such firmware might be low since some
major vendors do not allow redistributions without special agreements.
So other than a few packages that Spot is looking into, this might be
the only major issue we need to discuss further since disallowing a lot
of firmware might limit our wireless networking capabilities. With
laptop sales over taking desktops this is obviously a key issue we need
to look into.
Rahul
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Tom 'spot' Callaway" <tcallawa at redhat.com>
Subject: Free software and Fedora: Dissected
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 19:13:17 -0500
Size: 12349
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060731/643494e9/attachment.eml>
More information about the fedora-advisory-board
mailing list