Legal Update
Jesse Keating
jkeating at redhat.com
Mon Nov 19 16:23:47 UTC 2007
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:33:20 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> What I understood is that is that we can't explicitly say in words
> the reason behind why we don't include certain software. I don't
> consider the context in the workflow that I described as not allowed.
> Spot, let me know what you think. If we need to get legal
> confirmation on the specific workflow as I suggested, let's get that
> done.
I personally feel that you're trying any way possible to get around
what Legal has said. It's very reasonable to assume that if you
attempted to do /something/, were told that Fedora can't help you
do /something/ but if you happen to look over /here/, that we are now
putting context into what /here/ is and what /here/ provides. This is
what Legal does not want us to do.
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20071119/72bbb21f/attachment.sig>
More information about the fedora-advisory-board
mailing list