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

Re: The Multimedia Question

On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 23:03 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:28:28 -0400
> > Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Rahul Sundaram (sundaram fedoraproject org) said: 
> >>> Sure. We are going to ask legal anyway but the question is how can
> >>> we call something Fedora if it's not in our CVS which is not a
> >>> legal question and that is what I was responding to.  
> >> I'm fairly certain we *DON'T* want to do this, even if we do start
> >> pointing to a non-US repo.
> > 
> > Indeed.  We've been down the path of multiple SCMs and multiple build
> > systems and multiple repos.  We've all discovered that it just doesn't
> > work well in the long run.
> If we are going to point to a non-US repo, that repository would have 
> it's own build system and SCM managed by Fedora contributors anyway and 
> users would be dealing with that. Question is only about how close do we 
> want it to be associated with Fedora and messaging it as a Fedora 
> repository vs third party repository depending on technical and legal 
> ramifications.

Yes, that is the question.  And we've discussed that in the Secondary
arch stuff already.  It has to be built from our CVS to be considered as
a "Fedora" project.

If we're going to re-evaluate that for this new topic, fine.  But I want
a consistent policy across all of it.


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